TH3 Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 (edited) You can find your own link. He has a substantial record of results in the Senate...he should be a formidle candidate. I actually have no idea what he would want to do..... Edited March 22, 2015 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 Who in their right mind would elect a partisan freshman Senator with only 4 years of experience, uhh Forward! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted March 22, 2015 Author Share Posted March 22, 2015 My gut says a moderate R like Jeb or for that manner 41 could easily beat HRC, but Cruz/Huck/Palin...only make the GOP look bad and cast their smell toward viable andidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Who in their right mind would elect a partisan freshman Senator with only 4 years of experience, uhh Forward! Why not, it's a proven formula. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Who in their right mind would elect a partisan freshman Senator with no brain with only 4 years of experience, uhh Forward! Elect a scarecrow? Ha ha, don't think so. Obama won, this guy has no chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Who in their right mind would elect a partisan freshman Senator with only 4 years of experience, uhh Forward! In all fairness, if Barack Obama were white, Hillary would be half way into her second term right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted March 23, 2015 Author Share Posted March 23, 2015 (edited) In all fairness, if Barack Obama were white, Hillary would be half way into her second term right now.Actually. If the GOP could produce a decent candidate - BO wouldn't be in his second term. Further - if the GOP voters think veering farther to the right is going to work....get ready for 8 years of HRC.... Edited March 23, 2015 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Actually. If the GOP could produce a decent candidate - BO wouldn't be in his second term. Further - if the GOP voters think veering farther to the right is going to work....get ready for 8 years of HRC.... The consistency of small, responsive, responsible government always seems more remote the further you drift to the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Actually. If the GOP could produce a decent candidate - BO wouldn't be in his second term. Further - if the GOP voters think veering farther to the right is going to work....get ready for 8 years of HRC.... You keep telling yourself both of those stories, Scooter. They're almost as laughable as you trying to tell everyone you're 'an independent.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Obama - American mother, foreign father (Kenyan), born in Hawaii and the right-wing says if he can't absolutely prove he was born in the USA then he is disqualified for the office of President Cruz - American mother, foreign father (Cuban), born in Canada - so how is this guy not disqualified for the office of President or has the right-wing position evolved on the matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 (edited) Obama - American mother, foreign father (Kenyan), born in Hawaii and the right-wing says if he can't absolutely prove he was born in the USA then he is disqualified for the office of President Cruz - American mother, foreign father (Cuban), born in Canada - so how is this guy not disqualified for the office of President or has the right-wing position evolved on the matter I am unaware of the circumstances of how Senator Cruz obtained his citizenship; but that aside, it's because no one has the standing to challenge his eligibility, so it doesn't matter. That was established during this current Presidency. Edited March 24, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Obama - American mother, foreign father (Kenyan), born in Hawaii and the right-wing says if he can't absolutely prove he was born in the USA then he is disqualified for the office of President Cruz - American mother, foreign father (Cuban), born in Canada - so how is this guy not disqualified for the office of President or has the right-wing position evolved on the matter Ooooh, I never figured you for a birther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted March 24, 2015 Author Share Posted March 24, 2015 (edited) You keep telling yourself both of those stories, Scooter. They're almost as laughable as you trying to tell everyone you're 'an independent.' Why are you so worried about labels? My voting record is clearly independent Perot, Dole, Bush1, Bush2 in 2000, Obama 1, Johnson - not sure you can be more varied than that. I typically had voted mostly GOP for smaller offices but I think they are a mess right now and I don't agree with all the side issues they consume themselves with. What is so laughable about those statements? I liked McCain but as soon as Palin showed up - she was not fit for office so I voted for BO. I liked Romney all they way - but then he caved to the far right and started using the term "tax cuts" in his campaign. With rates at an all time low and receipts far below (17%) any range of historical spending (20%) - to talk about tax cuts was simply nonsensical and patronizing - so I voted for Johnson since he spoke what he really thought - whether he thought it would be well received or not. I am an independent voter. I would like to see a GOP candidate win. The winner needs to win the independent vote to win the election. The GOP is simply not going to win the GE with a far right or TP candidate - so the choice to me seems HRC or a more moderate GOP candidate. What do you want? The other half - all these far right flame throwing candidates - like Cruz - turn off the GOP to independent voters - I think they reflect poorly on the GOP and their gloom and doom message is tiresome.They may appeal to people like yourself - but your vote needs no convincing - the GOP needs to win the independent voters. So be nice to me...you need my vote Edited March 24, 2015 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Obama - American mother, foreign father (Kenyan), born in Hawaii and the right-wing says if he can't absolutely prove he was born in the USA then he is disqualified for the office of President Cruz - American mother, foreign father (Cuban), born in Canada - so how is this guy not disqualified for the office of President or has the right-wing position evolved on the matter Obama's "non-citizenship" was never a right-wing position. It was a crazy position. By the crazy person standard of judging Obama's citizenship, McCain couldn't have been president either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Why are you so worried about labels? My voting record is clearly independent Perot, Dole, Bush1, Bush2 in 2000, Obama 1, Johnson - not sure you can be more varied than that. I typically had voted mostly GOP for smaller offices but I think they are a mess right now and I don't agree with all the side issues they consume themselves with. What is so laughable about those statements? I liked McCain but as soon as Palin showed up - she was not fit for office so I voted for BO. I liked Romney all they way - but then he caved to the far right and started using the term "tax cuts" in his campaign. With rates at an all time low and receipts far below (17%) any range of historical spending (20%) - to talk about tax cuts was simply nonsensical and patronizing - so I voted for Johnson since he spoke what he really thought - whether he thought it would be well received or not. I am an independent voter. I would like to see a GOP candidate win. The winner needs to win the independent vote to win the election. The GOP is simply not going to win the GE with a far right or TP candidate - so the choice to me seems HRC or a more moderate GOP candidate. What do you want? The other half - all these far right flame throwing candidates - like Cruz - turn off the GOP to independent voters - I think they reflect poorly on the GOP and their gloom and doom message is tiresome. Can you please explain to me why the size of government should be indexed to the size of the domestic economy? People continue to trot out government spending as a percentage of GDP as if there was some logical reason for them to be related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 the anti-women's right to choose candidate Obama's "non-citizenship" was never a right-wing position. It was a crazy position. Same thing, the base of that wing is crazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 the anti-women's right to choose candidate Same thing, the base of that wing is crazy The base of both wings are crazy. You're a goddamn case study for crazy Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Why are you so worried about labels? My voting record is clearly independent Perot, Dole, Bush1, Bush2 in 2000, Obama 1, Johnson - not sure you can be more varied than that. I typically had voted mostly GOP for smaller offices but I think they are a mess right now and I don't agree with all the side issues they consume themselves with. What is so laughable about those statements? I liked McCain but as soon as Palin showed up - she was not fit for office so I voted for BO. I liked Romney all they way - but then he caved to the far right and started using the term "tax cuts" in his campaign. With rates at an all time low and receipts far below (17%) any range of historical spending (20%) - to talk about tax cuts was simply nonsensical and patronizing - so I voted for Johnson since he spoke what he really thought - whether he thought it would be well received or not. I am an independent voter. I would like to see a GOP candidate win. The winner needs to win the independent vote to win the election. The GOP is simply not going to win the GE with a far right or TP candidate - so the choice to me seems HRC or a more moderate GOP candidate. What do you want? The other half - all these far right flame throwing candidates - like Cruz - turn off the GOP to independent voters - I think they reflect poorly on the GOP and their gloom and doom message is tiresome.They may appeal to people like yourself - but your vote needs no convincing - the GOP needs to win the independent voters. So be nice to me...you need my vote So much messy in this... First, it's funny reading how you don't understand the need for labels while simultaneously labeling yourself 'an independent' while also insisting the only people who are doing things wrong carry the label of "GOP." Next, you try to explain that you opted to vote for a one-term Senator who couldn't run a lemonade stand because you thought the VP choice of McCain was poor, even after finding out that the one-term senator's choice for a VP was Joe Freaking Biden? That simply doesn't sound like an 'independent' at all, but rather someone TRYING to sound like an independent. Finally, you voted for Obama a second time because Mitt Romney was talking about tax cuts? And your concern with this is that the government was already not bringing in enough money? With independents like you, who needs liberals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 So much messy in this... First, it's funny reading how you don't understand the need for labels while simultaneously labeling yourself 'an independent' while also insisting the only people who are doing things wrong carry the label of "GOP." Next, you try to explain that you opted to vote for a one-term Senator who couldn't run a lemonade stand because you thought the VP choice of McCain was poor, even after finding out that the one-term senator's choice for a VP was Joe Freaking Biden? That simply doesn't sound like an 'independent' at all, but rather someone TRYING to sound like an independent. Finally, you voted for Obama a second time because Mitt Romney was talking about tax cuts? And your concern with this is that the government was already not bringing in enough money? With independents like you, who needs liberals? He voted for Johnson the second time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 He voted for Johnson the second time. Oh. That makes more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted March 24, 2015 Author Share Posted March 24, 2015 So much messy in this... First, it's funny reading how you don't understand the need for labels while simultaneously labeling yourself 'an independent' while also insisting the only people who are doing things wrong carry the label of "GOP." Next, you try to explain that you opted to vote for a one-term Senator who couldn't run a lemonade stand because you thought the VP choice of McCain was poor, even after finding out that the one-term senator's choice for a VP was Joe Freaking Biden? That simply doesn't sound like an 'independent' at all, but rather someone TRYING to sound like an independent. Finally, you voted for Obama a second time because Mitt Romney was talking about tax cuts? And your concern with this is that the government was already not bringing in enough money? With independents like you, who needs liberals? As someone already noted - voted for Johnson. Yes I voted for a partial term senator over a clearly experienced candidate because I thought - and this has proven to be true - that Sara Palin is batsh$%t crazy. Someone who makes such a poor choice simply to cater to a small segment does not get my vote - and as well - a heartbeat away bro - BO may not be your cup of team but SP running this country I could not fathom. Again - voted for JOHNSON not BO in 2012. Yes I am concerned that - at the time - the govt did not bring in enough money. During the Bush years revenues were down to 15 percent of GDP and spending was over 20. There is nothing conservative about this - just fiscally irresponsible. Federal spending will never be 15 percent GDP. As as far as indexing the govt revenues to GDP -that is the way most economists look at it - what else do you want to do? Most federal expenses are SS/MC/Defense - what over 80 percent of the budget - so if you want govt to be smaller please have the GOP tell me how they are going to make these programs smaller AND pass that legislation - and yes I have been reviewing the current budget process and am disappointed that the GOP can't just be realistic with the american people - its all they want and it would go over well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 As someone already noted - voted for Johnson. Yes I voted for a partial term senator over a clearly experienced candidate because I thought - and this has proven to be true - that Sara Palin is batsh$%t crazy. Someone who makes such a poor choice simply to cater to a small segment does not get my vote - and as well - a heartbeat away bro - BO may not be your cup of team but SP running this country I could not fathom. Again - voted for JOHNSON not BO in 2012. Yes I am concerned that - at the time - the govt did not bring in enough money. During the Bush years revenues were down to 15 percent of GDP and spending was over 20. There is nothing conservative about this - just fiscally irresponsible. Federal spending will never be 15 percent GDP. As as far as indexing the govt revenues to GDP -that is the way most economists look at it - what else do you want to do? Most federal expenses are SS/MC/Defense - what over 80 percent of the budget - so if you want govt to be smaller please have the GOP tell me how they are going to make these programs smaller AND pass that legislation - and yes I have been reviewing the current budget process and am disappointed that the GOP can't just be realistic with the american people - its all they want and it would go over well. That's not an answer to my question. Why should the size of government be indexed to economic growth? Our GDP is roughly 16.8T. If government expendatures were 17% of that figure, amounting to 2.85T, and the government met all of it's obligations using that 2.85T, why do they need more? If GDP is 17.1T next year, why does the government need to grow in accordance with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 That's not an answer to my question. Why should the size of government be indexed to economic growth? Our GDP is roughly 16.8T. If government expendatures were 17% of that figure, amounting to 2.85T, and the government met all of it's obligations using that 2.85T, why do they need more? If GDP is 17.1T next year, why does the government need to grow in accordance with that? Because the GDP rose because the government spent the $2.85T which was likely more than the year before. So in order for GDP growth to continue the government needs more money to drive that growth. [/gator] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Glenn Beck says Obamacare has a new customer... http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/24/obamacare-has-a-new-customer-ted-cruz/ Just thought this was kind of funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Glenn Beck says Obamacare has a new customer... http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/24/obamacare-has-a-new-customer-ted-cruz/ Just thought this was kind of funny. I imagine that Cruz and his wife have more than enough money between them to cover all their costs out of pocket, so my guess is that he's planning on using his family's 'membership' as a source for 'first-hand horror stories' in his run to repeal it. But you're right, it is kind of funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 That's not an answer to my question. Why should the size of government be indexed to economic growth? Our GDP is roughly 16.8T. If government expendatures were 17% of that figure, amounting to 2.85T, and the government met all of it's obligations using that 2.85T, why do they need more? If GDP is 17.1T next year, why does the government need to grow in accordance with that? Because they go hand in hand. It's sort of like your earning being related to the size of your mortgage. The more you make the more you can afford to spend on a house or land Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Because they go hand in hand. It's sort of like your earning being related to the size of your mortgage. The more you make the more you can afford to spend on a house or land Explain how they "go hand in hand". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Explain how they "go hand in hand". It's simple, the more money you earn the more money the bond market is willing to lend at lower interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 It's simple, the more money you earn the more money the bond market is willing to lend at lower interest. What? The more who earns? Besides, that's not what I'm getting at. The reason statists attempt a government spending as a percentage of GDP argument, when the two need not be related, is because an industrialized economy, over time, will always grow; and those statists know that such a link guarentees the growth of government. Including all waste spending, our government was fully funded to meet all of it's obligations last year. It doesn't need an increased % of GDP to meet this year's obligations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 What? The more who earns? Besides, that's not what I'm getting at. The reason statists attempt a government spending as a percentage of GDP argument, when the two need not be related, is because an industrialized economy, over time, will always grow; and those statists know that such a link guarentees the growth of government. Including all waste spending, our government was fully funded to meet all of it's obligations last year. It doesn't need an increased % of GDP to meet this year's obligations. Its helping spread the wealth without raising taxes. Win-win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Its helping spread the wealth without raising taxes. Win-win That's a non-sequitur. It's also not an argument as to why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 That's a non-sequitur. It's also not an argument as to why. If everyone understood how the system worked they would agree with me and not with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 If everyone understood how the system worked they would agree with me and not with you. You haven't yet explained why you agree with you. It's awfully premature to say others should or would, in that light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 You haven't yet explained why you agree with you. It's awfully premature to say others should or would, in that light. You didn't understand the "win-win" comment??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 You didn't understand the "win-win" comment??? "Win-win" is a declaration, not an explaination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 What? The more who earns? Besides, that's not what I'm getting at. The reason statists attempt a government spending as a percentage of GDP argument, when the two need not be related, is because an industrialized economy, over time, will always grow; and those statists know that such a link guarentees the growth of government. Including all waste spending, our government was fully funded to meet all of it's obligations last year. It doesn't need an increased % of GDP to meet this year's obligations. But with the baby boomers, veterans problems and other issue, they actually do need to increase borrowing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 But with the baby boomers, veterans problems and other issue, they actually do need to increase borrowing So when you have a company and you have a P&L problem is the only course of action to increase sales? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I wanna be a BIRTHER .... sorry couldn't resist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 But with the baby boomers, veterans problems and other issue, they actually do need to increase borrowing Why are you confusing borrowing with spending a higher percentage of GDP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I wanna be a BIRTHER .... sorry couldn't resist Go for it. Will mock the crap out of you like we did the right wing crazy birthers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts