T1B

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 9:47 am**

Assuming the polls are painting the accurate picture, and McCain and the GOP go down to defeat on the 4th, what is the future of the republican party?

How is the GOP 'reshaped' to once again find favor with the American people, and who can you see emerging as a leader ... or even as a prospective candidate for '12?

On the other hand, imagine if Obama goes down to what would be a VERY bitter defeat.

The dems would still have considerable power in Washington, but who, other than Obama, could you see stepping up to be a major player in '12?

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:57 pm**

First of all, why the " " ? They are the major parties and probably will be for some time to come. Both parties will do fine no matter who loses. Who could have predicted an Obama candidacy 4 years ago ? One thing is certain and that is that public financing for presidential elections is over. Obama and his back-stabbing of McCain to use his own method of financing has seen to that. Republicans will never get "snookered" again on it and the Dems can never put that genie back in the bottle.
Sadly there is a highly qualified candidate on the Republican side who will likely never see a presidential run. His only problem is his last name. The Democrats will have a seasoned senator to run in 2012 too who happens to also have the same last name as another former POTUS.
Like the basics of our economy-the basics of our political system are SOUND !

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:02 pm**

Wolfman wrote:Sadly there is a highly qualified candidate on the Republican side who will likely never see a presidential run. His only problem is his last name.

Well that and he was born in Austria.

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:36 pm**

BSmack wrote:
Wolfman wrote:Sadly there is a highly qualified candidate on the Republican side who will likely never see a presidential run. His only problem is his last name.
Well that and he was born in Austria.

I figured he was talking about Jeb...

Who was born in Texas...

Although if it's Jeb he's talking about...

Nothing new here -- he's an idiot.

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:07 pm**

poptart wrote: who can you see emerging as a leader ... or even as a prospective candidate for '12?

Sonja Hennie is out

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:27 pm**

Cuda wrote:Sonja Hennie is out

RACK it!!!

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:11 pm**

BSmack wrote:
Wolfman wrote:Sadly there is a highly qualified candidate on the Republican side who will likely never see a presidential run. His only problem is his last name.
Well that and he was born in Austria.

Ron Paul wasn't born in Austria. He was born in Green Tree, Pennsylvania. And I don't think his last name is what's preventing him from a legitimate presidential run. It probably has more to do with the inordinate amount of influence the religious right has on the GOP.

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:27 pm**

mvscal wrote:
MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan wrote: It probably has more to do with the inordinate amount of influence the religious right has on the GOP.
That explains why McCain got the nomination. Oh, wait...no it doesn't.

It certainly explains his choice of running mate.

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2008 9:41 pm**

mvscal wrote:So what? VP is a joke.

when the Pres. candidate is 72 with a history of recurring cancer it most certainly does figure into the equation....

but you can't seem to get your hands around that concept

Posted: **Sat Nov 01, 2008 12:52 am**

So--if you are 72 and have had some skin problems you are supposed to just fade away into the sunset ??

FUCK YOU pal and the horse you rode in on !!!
keep your hand around your dick where you always have it !

what a bunch of unmitigated shit-heads

Posted: **Sat Nov 01, 2008 1:49 am**

Wolfman wrote:So--if you are 72 and have had some skin problems you are supposed to just fade away into the sunset ??

FUCK YOU pal and the horse you rode in on !!!
keep your hand around your dick where you always have it !

what a bunch of unmitigated shit-heads

That is fucking hilarious...in a pathetic, doddering, get off of my yard kind of way.

Posted: **Sat Nov 01, 2008 4:00 pm**

Wolfman wrote: what a bunch of unmitigated shit-heads

Uhm...

I don't think "unmitigated" means what you think it means.

So--if you are 72 and have had some skin problems you are supposed to just fade away into the sunset ??

Combine that with the stress endured from trying to keep lie after lie after lie after lie covering the tracks of severe corruption, and it doesn't make for a good prognosis.

Posted: **Sat Nov 01, 2008 4:12 pm**

Hey, cut wolfie some slack you unmitigated douchebag.
He's just trying to stand up for his own.

Old folks' lib!!
We shall underwhelm.

Off our rockers, actin' crazy
With the right medication we won't be lazy
Doin' the old folks boogie
Down on the farm
Wheelchairs, they was locked arm in arm
Paired off pacemakers with matchin' alarms
Gives us jus' one more chance
To spin one more yarn

And you know that you're over the hill
When your mind makes a promise that your body can't fill
Doin' the old folks boogie
And boogie we will
'Cause to us the thought's as good as a thrill

Back at the home,
No time is your own,
Facillities there, they're all out on loan
The bank forclose, and your bankruptcy shows
And your credit creeps to an all-time low
So you know, that you're over the hill
When your mind makes a promise that your body can't fill

Try and get a rise from an atrophied muscle,
And the nerves in your thigh just quivers and fizzles
So you know, that you're over the hill
When your mind makes a promise that your body can't fill

Posted: **Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:01 am**

Nice meltdown, wolfie!

Beanscal;
The reason McSame got the nomination is because the thumpers were able to rub two brain cells together & figure out that it's better to have a moderate who might SCOTUS appointments somewhat to their liking instead of getting a president who would appoint justices who would w/o question affirm Roe V. Wade.

The left isn't that smart, yet.

Posted: **Sun Nov 02, 2008 1:00 am**

Diego in Seattle wrote:Nice meltdown, wolfie!

Beanscal;
The reason McSame got the nomination is because the thumpers were able to rub two brain cells together & figure out that it's better to have a moderate who might SCOTUS appointments somewhat to their liking instead of getting a president who would appoint justices who would w/o question affirm Roe V. Wade.

The left isn't that smart, yet.

nice rationalization

Posted: **Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:18 pm**

titlover wrote:
Diego in Seattle wrote:Nice meltdown, wolfie!

Beanscal;
The reason McSame got the nomination is because the thumpers were able to rub two brain cells together & figure out that it's better to have a moderate who might SCOTUS appointments somewhat to their liking instead of getting a president who would appoint justices who would w/o question affirm Roe V. Wade.

The left isn't that smart, yet.

nice rationalization

Nice non-answer.

Posted: **Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:15 pm**

Wolfman wrote:Republicans will never get "snookered" again on it and the Dems can never put that genie back in the bottle.

First of all, why the " " ?

Posted: **Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:15 pm**

huh? wrote:
Wolfman wrote:So--if you are 72 and have had some skin problems you are supposed to just fade away into the sunset ??

FUCK YOU pal and the horse you rode in on !!!
keep your hand around your dick where you always have it !

what a bunch of unmitigated shit-heads

That is fucking hilarious...in a pathetic, doddering, get off of my yard kind of way.

Posted: **Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:34 pm**

Second the rack for huh?

This thread needs to go to the archives, so we'll always have a reminder of Wolfman.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:33 am**

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Second the rack for huh?

This thread needs to go to the archives, so we'll always have a reminder of Wolfman.

I would think that in LeRoy you would have plenty of reminders. Have you no diners? VFW halls? Insane asylums?

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 6:34 am**

BSmack wrote:
Terry in Crapchester wrote:Second the rack for huh?

This thread needs to go to the archives, so we'll always have a reminder of Wolfman.
I would think that in LeRoy you would have plenty of reminders. Have you no diners? VFW halls? Insane asylums?

Diners? I guess that depends on what you call a diner. There was one I used to visit on occasion, but it shut down.

VFW halls? How about an American Legion, that close enough? I could stand on my front porch, turn my head to the right and spit, and I'd have a decent shot at hitting the American Legion, that's how close it is.

Insane asylums? Nah, only about 7,000 people live here.

Of course, there are plenty of "get off my yard" types here. But even in Le Roy, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone stupid enough to think that Jeb Bush's last name would be a liability to Presidential aspirations via the Republican Party.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:04 pm**

Terry in Crapchester wrote:. But even in Le Roy, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone stupid enough to think that Jeb Bush's last name would be a liability to Presidential aspirations via the Republican Party.

you have a better chance to become president than anybody named Bush.

if there's one good thing Chimpy has done in his 8 years, it's to forever ruin the family name as far as political office is concerned.

& good riddance to Elizabeth Dole too.

Posted: **Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:40 am**

Where does Palin fit in? She apparently "fires up the base".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/0 ... 41653.html

I know huffpo may not be a credible source, but the video is from Fox. Kind of jaw-dropping, if true.

From the article:

"However, perhaps one of the most astounding and previously unknown tidbits about Sarah Palin has to do with her already dubious grasp of geography. According to Fox News Chief White House Correspondent Carl Cameron, there was great concern within the McCain campaign that Palin lacked "a degree of knowledgeability necessary to be a running mate, a vice president, a heartbeat away from the presidency," in part because she didn't know which countries were in NAFTA, and she "didn't understand that Africa was a continent, rather than a series, a country just in itself."

Posted: **Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:53 pm**

When Stevens is booted out of the senate, Palin will appoint herself to finish his term

Posted: **Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:08 am**

What are the republicans feelings towards Rick Perry? Seems like a decent feller. Too soon for the "Gov. from TX" route? Haven't really heard anything bad about him, and unlike Bible Spice, he isn't/wasn't under investigation...yet. He certainly seems well positioned moving forward. Just a thought.

Posted: **Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:29 am**

huh? wrote:What are the republicans feelings towards Rick Perry?

I think his brothers Joe and Steve are more successful. Joe is apparently a Republican. All his skeletons are well known and he'll bring that "Star Appeal" to the ticket. Not as popular and probably a bleeding heart, Steve, won't do. Even if he was Republican, he's far too sentimental for Washington and the hardball politics played here.

RACK "Bible Spice" by the way.

Posted: **Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:09 pm**

huh? wrote: Too soon for the "Gov. from TX" route?

Not at all. Chimpy gets a twofer: forever discredits not only anybody named Bush, but also (with help from LBJ to be sure) all Texans

T1B

The future of the two 'major' parties?

The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?

Re: The future of the two 'major' parties?