Are you considering a vote for Hillary?
- Thread starter Duck_walk
- Start date
If my vote was the difference between her, or whoever comes out of the Republican clown car. Yes I will vote for her. But I will see what it looks like in Nov. If she has a big lead I will write in Sanders, if he is not the nominee.
A
ag-man
Guest
It accomplishes him being able to parrot the liberal talking point "clown car". A number of those in the. "Clown car" a much better choice than the habitual liar and despicable human being he is going to vote for.
I'm impressed he posted before NM told him what to say.
Well it's kind of like when you are beating a team by 50. Another 3 pointer from me is just piling on, but when you let the kid on the end of the bench (like aggie) shoot a 3, everyone feels better about themselves. In 10 years, Bernie will be able to say I got a vote in Dunklin County for President. I will be able to say "I have never voted for a Clinton in my lifetime." I can also say I voted for the person I felt was best. 20 some years ago, I voted in my first election and instead of voting for Bill Clinton, I wrote in Paul Tsongas.
A
ag-man
Guest
Then you and I have more in common than I thought. We have both never voted for a clinton. Somehow I like you a little better now
Although that is not hard to doAnd that was BEFORE you had been in the classroom too long.
You go dude, vote for whom ever you see fit to vote for.It was all over the place. But some of the questions were fair and the candidates used the other poor questions as an excuse to not answer them.
I have no clue why they asked a fantasy football regulation question, for instance. Total waste of time.
Attacking the media is really popular with the R base and an excellent way to not answer a question you don't want to answer
The Becky Quick/Donald Trump back and forth on Mark Zuckerberg was absolutely incredible - a clear sign of a moderator/questioner who was wholly unprepared for the task
It was about gambling and whether or not the government should get involved in regulating it. Doesn't the government have regulations on other types of gambling?
I agree, but my point is that fantasy football is, what, the 500th most important issue they could have talked about? I know we have 800 debates but I totally agreed with Chris Christie that this is not a major enough issue to deserve discussion in a debate.
Cruz tried repeatedly to get time to answer the question once he made the point of the foolishness of the line of questions. He was in no way dodging the question but the "questioners" were too po'ed to allow it.
Maybe he should've just answered the question with his allotted time instead of whining.
They gotta face the fact that the GOP is the party of big deficits first...and they ALWAYS approve spending caps when they're in the WH.
I assume the point of the question was more about they're take on government regulations than about fantasy football.
Nah it was really a gambling question. Sheldon adelson thinks that's a big deal but I really don't.
Candidates rarely answer the question that is asked, so there isn't much new with that.
The question was to Cruz. Anyone who doubts whether Cruz would attack the debt and deficit is looney tunes. Cruz, Paul, and Carson all find the debt immoral.
Hannity and co. wouldn't affect Sanders much because he is already so far out there. Hillary and co. would be exposed (in the questions) as very out of touch. If the questions don't have to be more than an opinion of the questioner, the candidate can be said to be anything.
I think this would be entertaining. But it will never ever happen
I sincerely hope the dems do a debate on fox with the same panel who did the first R debate. They were good.
I think you understate the degree to which these commentators are not in line with mainstream America. Ds wouldn't necessarily hate to be able to say "look at how ridiculous and out of touch these guys are"
Again it will never happen but I don't view it as some nightmare scenario for Hillary.
Which is a reason to not vote for them because that is a silly policy position not grounded in economics.
No, they find debt that democrats support immoral. Paul is the only one that I find that's seriously against debt.
Wrong.
They oppose liberal policies but all debt. You just don't like how they eliminate debt.
Veer was saying they wouldn't oppose debt. My post was in response to that.
If you want debt you don't need to vote for those guys but it's just your opinion that debt is good. Most people rank the federal debt as a major concern and believe it should be stopped and eliminated.
Conservatives believe that is the one role the federal government must play over ANY other. You don't have to run a deficit to defend the country.
Liberals place many things higher in importance.
Similar threads
