telcoman wrote:Not a very good one to attract the women's vote

Never been able to understand how a party that want's less government in peoples lives wants to be in their bedroom and doctors offices?

Telcoman

It's rather obvious that any republican candidate that is pro-choice or supports Planned Parenthood or gay marriage, will never win the RNC nomination. It's sad the RNC has devolved itself in these areas. But Kasich appears a little less extreme and bit more pragmatic about the hot button social issues than the other candidates and is possibly the only republican candidate that might appeal to the moderates, whose support is required to win the white house.

Bubba1 wrote:It's rather obvious that any republican candidate that is pro-choice or supports Planned Parenthood or gay marriage, will never win the RNC nomination. It's sad the RNC has devolved itself in these areas. ....

It is also sad what they did to the Benghazi Select Committee hearing.
The wasted $4.7 million of taxpayer money that they have spent so far with very little to show for it could now be considered a campaign contribution to elect Hillary in 2016.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"Speaking of which, whatever Republicans hoped to accomplish in the hearing, they fell embarrassingly short. You don’t have to like Clinton to objectively observe that the hearing was little more than a prolonged reiteration of known bungling characterized by contempt-coated questions delivered with near-hatred. At times, I thought lasers might suddenly burst from Ohio Republican Jim Jordan’s eyes and incinerate Clinton on the spot."

I hope in Hillary's inaugural speech upon taking office in January 2017 that she gives a special mention to those republicans on the Benghazi committee that helped her win the presidential election after giving her the opportunity to speak for over 8 1/2 hours at the 11 hour hearing.

Telcoman

There was two 9-11 committees.
Seven Benghazi committees.

It's obvious that they didn't care about those who past and how to make sure this doesn't happen again.
Then this idiot comes out and says what everyone was thinking.

The Republican party is the least funny joke I know of.

Then they will threaten to shutdown the government.

Apparently the Democratic party has finally adopted a policy of transparency, they're not even trying to hide cheating to win.

Iowa Democratic party altered precinct's caucus results during chaotic night
Shift of one delegate from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton raises questions about Iowa Democratic party’s management of first-in-the-nation vote.

Read more at: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016 ... on-sanders

The Des Moines Register:
Iowa's nightmare revisited: Was correct winner called?
Editorial: Something smells in the Democratic Party

"MANCHESTER, N.H. — A malfunctioning Marco Rubio crashed as he was overloaded by attacks last night from New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who tried to portray the Florida U.S. senator as a Washington robot pre-programmed by political consultants during a high-stakes Republican debate.Another Republican crashes"

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_pol ... _and_burns
Bye Marco!

Telcoman

Chris Christie is another loser

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=SL5CDHP

"Trying instead to match Mr. Christie, Mr. Rubio ventured into new and not entirely comfortable terrain. He criticized the governor for the nine credit downgrades that had occurred in New Jersey on his watch. He declared that Mr. Christie had to be shamed into returning to his own state during a major snowstorm two weeks ago."

Christie has totally screwed up the state of New Jersey and we can't wait to get rid of him.

Telcoman

Bye Rubio you programmed robot loser



Telcoman

Hillary Clinton is raking in donations from Wall Street, and her attempts to downplay it are under fire.

Hillary Says $150K in Contributions She Received From Oil Industry Is ‘Not Very Much’
http://freebeacon.com/politics/hillary- ... very-much/
“Yeah, I don’t even know what you’re referring to, but big oil knows I’m not their friends, so they must have put it in the wrong envelope,” Clinton responded.

Hillary Clinton's fuzzy math on her Wall Street donors
http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/21/investi ... donations/
As the Daily Caller points out, the $150,000 figure cited by the activist is an outdated number from September. Clinton has now accepted $226,804 in contributions from the oil and gas industry.

During the Democratic town hall that aired on CNN Wednesday night, Hillary Clinton completely fell apart onstage when Anderson Cooper asked her about $675,000 she received for delivering three speeches at Goldman Sachs.

telcoman wrote:Bye Rubio you programmed robot loser

Telcoman

Ever since last fall, the betting houses have been saying Rubio will win the White House. Here's the latest odds:

Bunch of nonsense in my opinion.
How about listening to intellegent people that know more than you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/opini ... inion&_r=0

Action of the stupid party

"In other news, last week — on Groundhog Day, to be precise — Republicans in the House of Representatives cast what everyone knew was a purely symbolic, substance-free vote to repeal Obamacare. It was the 63rd time they’ve done so."

"Mr. Rubio’s inability to do anything besides repeat canned talking points was startling. Worse, it was funny, which means that it has gone viral. And it reinforced the narrative that he is nothing but an empty suit. But really, isn’t everyone in his party doing pretty much the same thing, if not so conspicuously?"

"The truth is that the whole G.O.P. seems stuck in a time loop, saying and doing the same things over and over. And unlike Bill Murray’s character in the movie “Groundhog Day,” Republicans show no sign of learning anything from experience."

Go place you bets on a republican and be prepared to lose

Telcoman

telcoman wrote:Bunch of nonsense in my opinion.
How about listening to intellegent people that know more than you?

Telcoman

From someone that can't spell intelligent, whilst using Wikipedia as a reference?

The man doth protest too much, methinks.

Sorry about the typo.
Very intelligent and very smart

https://berniesanders.com/?nosplash=true/

Telcoman

More on Marcobot

One who will not be completing the march to the White House in 2016

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... -breakdown

"I’m reminded once more of a piece Erik Eisele, a reporter for the Conway Daily Sun in New Hampshire, wrote in December after a 20-minute interview with the Republican candidate. “It was like watching a computer algorithm designed to cover talking points,” the reporter said. “He said a lot, but at the same time said nothing. It was like someone wound him up, pointed him towards the doors and pushed play. If there was a human side to senator, a soul, it didn’t come across.”

The republican candidates are so funny and so incompetent it really makes one wonder how did they ever get elected.

Telcoman

telcoman wrote:...The republican candidates are so funny and so incompetent it really makes one wonder how did they ever get elected.

Telcoman

Well, they don't cheat the way the Democrats do:

Iowans claim instances when Sanders was shorted delegates
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/ ... /79902080/
Keane Schwarz is certain he knows the outcome of the vote in his precinct: He was the lone caucusgoer in Woodbury County No. 43.

But the Iowa Democratic Party's final results state that Hillary Clinton won one county delegate and Bernie Sanders received zero.

"I voted for Bernie," Schwarz, 36, of Oto, told The Des Moines Register. “It was really suspicious … I’m actually pretty irate about it.”

Why would anyone continue to support a party that openly cheats like that?

Oh and FWI, I'm NOT a Rubio supporter.

Rogue One wrote:Why would anyone continue to support a party that openly cheats like that?

Perhaps because it is the party that doesn't only represent millionaires and billionaires.
The party that wants to raise the minimum wage
The party that supports healthcare for all
The party that wants to provide college tuition for all
The party that respects gay rights
The party that supports women's health and the right to a safe abortion.
The party that wants to ban assault weapons,require background checks, prevent mentally ill from obtaining weapons and is not afraid to stand up to the NRA
The party that supports equal pay for equal work
The party that wants to keep and raise social security benefits and not destroy it
The party that wants to overturn the Citizens United Supreme Court decision.
The party that wants full disclosure of all political contributions.
The party that wants to keep the ACA and not waste time by attempting to repeal it 63 times
The party that wants to raise the taxes of millionaires and billionaires

Perhaps I've missed a few others?

Are you forgetting the party that cheated Al Gore and allowed Bush to become president?

Telcoman

And I did forget to mention one very important item

The party that recognizes the importance of Global Warming

http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/

Telcoman

The party with the candidate being investigated by the FBI.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/fbi-formally ... ail-server

And now the other party has a p****

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... cruz-a-puy

Telcoman

And Hillary folds like a cheap pants suit.

Clinton quickly concedes defeat in NH primary

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pre ... nh-primary

Two more republicans that won't be marching to the white house.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-e ... SKCN0VJ2FC

Telcoman

Not surprising to me. Christie was wise to get out before the NJ primary, where he probably would have lost embarrassingly (his approval ratings there are very low). Fiorina had zero charisma, and I wonder if her continuing to defend that discredited planned parenthood video even after learning it was bogus sealed her fate.

Ah, yes, the champions of the "little guy. I'm sure all those lobbyists serve average folks. (Not saying Republicans are different, they aren't and it excuses neither that they both do it)

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/ ... -donations

With the DNC now accepting all lobbyist and PAC donations, it has reversed the policies that were adopted in 2008, when Obama vowed to curb the influence of special interests in Washington.

So, I expect Obama will announce he is leaving the Democrat party?

"We are going to change how Washington works," Obama said at the time. Lobbyists and corporate PACs “will not fund my party. They will not run our White House. And they will not drown out the voice of the American people when I'm president of the United States of America.”

themadscientist wrote:So, I expect Obama will announce he is leaving the Democrat party?

Obama will not be leaving the Democratic party. He will only be leaving the white house at the end of his term and turning it over to Hillary or possibly Bernie.

Telcoman

So, he doesn't keep his word and that's ok with you. Got it. Not surprised, actually.

President Obama was elected twice by the American people.
No one could have predicted the intransigence of the republicans who not only tried and failed to make president Obama a one term president but opposed positions that republicans were previously for when president Obama agreed with republican positions.
We are now seeing how the republicans intend to govern with the death of Antonin Scalia. The president has a duty to appoint another Supreme Court justice and the senate has a duty to confirm or deny the confirmation. Those votes will be considered by the voters in the November election.
Republicans failing to do their jobs and wasting 24 billion taxpayer dollars to shut down the government makes republicans unfit to govern in my opinion.
Just remember President Obama taught constitional law prior to being elected twice as president so he knows much more about our constitution
than right wing talking heads.

telcoman wrote:Just remember President Obama taught constitional (sic) law prior to being elected twice as president so he knows much more about our constitution than right wing talking heads.

Funniest thing I've read in awhile. As they say actions speak louder than words. Obama's actions show a clear disregard for the constitution and the intentions of our Founding Fathers.

I just love how politicians conveniently forget past history.

When George W. Bush was still president, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) advocated almost the exact same approach McConnell is planning to pursue. During a speech at a convention of the American Constitution Society in July 2007, Schumer said if any new Supreme Court vacancies opened up, Democrats should not allow Bush the chance to fill it “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer said, according to Politico. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.” During the same speech, Schumer lamented that he hadn’t managed to block Bush’s prior Supreme Court nominations.

Notably, when he made his remarks in 2007, Bush had about seven more months remaining in his presidential term than Obama has remaining in his.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/14/flash ... z40FJWSiLo

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) claimed that Republicans’ opposition to Obama’s eventual nominee was “a threat to our democracy itself.”

In contrast to Warren’s argument now, then-Senator Obama categorically rejected the argument that the nomination debate ended when President Bush “won the election.” During Alito’s confirmation hearings, Obama took the senate floor to say: “There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have complete authority to appoint his nominee…that once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question as to whether the judge should be confirmed. I disagree with this view.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/15/senat ... z40FP2WDC2

That's funny. Rogue. I figured a recent example would turn up to show each side playing the exact same silly petty partisan game. Fortunately, if the republicans play the partisan card in this case and stall the confirmations, the legal system will continue uninterrupted. With just 8 SC justices, a lower ruling will carry if the SC cannot come to a majority decision. So depending on what kinda cases get heard by the court before the end of Obama's term, it could be a case of be careful what you wish for. Of course, has anyone considered who Donald Trump would nominate for a SC Justice should he get elected president? I could picture his short list including Judge Judy or Howard Stern.

Bubba1 wrote:..... it could be a case of be careful what you wish for.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=SL5CDHP

"Who gets to fill the Supreme Court, of course, is always an issue in presidential elections, and three justices are over 77. But nothing would make the stakes higher than a vacancy that the next president would immediately get to fill. If Republicans succeed in blocking Mr. Obama’s appointment, it will make the party’s senators more vulnerable to the charge that they’re obstructionists who are part of the problem in Washington."

Telcoman

I am puzzled by your stance, which echo's that of other Democrats. After all, you've assured us that Hillary will be the next President, so why the concern if the next President chooses a replacement SCJ. Are you now indicating this is not the case? Or are you and the Democratic leadership intimating a lack of faith in HRC's ability to pick the right candidate to push through the left's agenda?

I agree with Rogue, your post confused me too. If this were to follow the traditional political playbook, then I think Obama will probably nominate someone who recently went thru a congressional vetting process with Republican blessing, so that person will likely be moderate, not liberal. That way if the Republicans decline that person for partisan reasons alone, they'll end up looking bad, which could easily produce fodder for the upcoming election. It'll be interesting to see what happens