IDBillzFan Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 http://hosted.ap.org...-12-10-13-45-17 She's going to have to play the sexist card early and often once Barry starts dishing the dirt on her to give Fauxcahontas a chance. Unfortunately for the left, Hillary represents the front, middle and back of a very shallow bench of Democrats for the foreseeable future.
Nanker Posted December 10, 2014 Author Posted December 10, 2014 http://hosted.ap.org...-12-10-13-45-17 It's hard to tell the truth in the US State Department. She's going to have to play the sexist card early and often once Barry starts dishing the dirt on her to give Fauxcahontas a chance. Unfortunately for the left, Hillary represents the front, middle and back of a very shallow bench of Democrats for the foreseeable future. The Dems have no one but her and Phohawkahontis. Who else is there - Biden? Cuomo? Candy Crowley?
Doc Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Fauxcahontas (still love that nickname!) said she's not running. I believe her. But like with everything, I'll wait and see.
/dev/null Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) The Dems have no one but her and Phohawkahontis. Who else is there - Biden? Cuomo? Candy Crowley? Jim Webb (Former Virginia Senator) has been talking about it Jerry Brown (California Governor) and Martin O'Malley (Former Maryland Governor) have both been rumored I'd love to see Joe Manchin run, but he'd have a snowballs chance in the primaries Might see fringe candidates like Colonel Sanders (Vermont Senator), Dennis Kucinich (Cleveland Elf), and Howard Dean (former Vemont Governor and DNC chair) And a dark horse candidate if Hilary decides not to run...John Kerry Edited December 10, 2014 by /dev/null
Chef Jim Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 Jim Webb (Former Virginia Senator) has been talking about it Jerry Brown (California Governor) and Martin O'Malley (Former Maryland Governor) have both been rumored I'd love to see Joe Manchin run, but he'd have a snowballs chance in the primaries Might see fringe candidates like Colonel Sanders (Vermont Senator), Dennis Kucinich (Cleveland Elf), and Howard Dean (former Vemont Governor and DNC chair) And a dark horse candidate if Hilary decides not to run...John Kerry Jerry Brown??? Dude's 120 years old now.
IDBillzFan Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 Jerry Brown??? Dude's 120 years old now. Not to mention, America will take one look at what an open border sanctuary state looks like and collectively scream "Hell, no."
Nanker Posted December 11, 2014 Author Posted December 11, 2014 Ah! Kali Forn Yah. The workers paradise. "California dreaming on such a winter's day."
IDBillzFan Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) Ah! Kali Forn Yah. The workers paradise. One of the funniest things happening in the state right now is how the entertaininment industry is now shooting movies in other states. All these libs spend millions of dollars to put libs in office and push lib-loved taxes, and then decide it's too expensive to do work here and take it out of state. This is why it's a sanctuary state. In due time, they'll need to compensate for all the liberal votes, and nothing gets libs re-elected faster than handing out freebies and voting registration forms to illegal aliens. Interesting side note: in California, they're not called illegal aliens. They're called Raider fans. Edited December 11, 2014 by LABillzFan
B-Man Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) Fauxcahontas (still love that nickname!) said she's not running. I believe her. But like with everything, I'll wait and see. Elizabeth Warren threatens to make the GOP shut down the government or something When is a shutdown not a shutdown? As Noah pointed out at great length last night, the answer is when Democrats do it. This applies not only to their fellow progressives, but to most of the media as well. (But I repeat myself.) It’s never a shutdown for them, but a principled stand to prevent Republican robbery, murder, mayhem or whatever. But a new twist was put on this theme when Elizabeth Warren addressed the current budget turmoil. It’s no secret that Warren is steaming mad over sections of the cromnibus which would roll back certain provisions of the dysfunctional Dodd-Frank regulations. It’s a great selling point for her if she is actually is harboring some secret ambitions to take a run at Hillary, because her signature move is to jump on anything which weakens capitalist principles. But when she took to the podium to lambast her colleagues on the subject, we saw an entirely new bit of verbal sword dancing. (Emphasis added) Now, the House of Representatives is about to show us the worst of government for the rich and powerful. The House is about to vote on a budget deal. A deal negotiated behind closed doors that slips in a provision that would let derivatives traders on Wall Street gamble with taxpayer money and get bailed out by the government when their risky bets threaten to blow up our financial system. These are the same banks that nearly broke the economy in 2008 and destroyed millions of jobs. …. And now, no debate and no discussion, Republicans in the House of Representatives are threatening to shut down the government if they don’t get a chance to repeal it. That raises a simple question. Why? If this rule brings more stability to our financial system. If this rule helps prevent future government bailouts. Why in the world would anyone want to repeal it? Let alone hold the entire government hostage to ram through this appeal. Excuse me? Did you really just say that Republicans were threatening to shut down the government? You are aware that you’re actually a member of the Senate now and that there are cameras recording you, right? Not that I’m all that anxious to give a boost to your career, Senator Warren, but allow me to help you out with something. The House – both Democrats and Republicans – have put together a package, detestable as it may be in many regards, which funds nearly the entire government for a full year. (And Homeland Security for at least a couple of months.) The GOP worked with your party to put it together and by passing it, you keep the government open. If you stand up and begin a stampede of your Democrat counterparts to shoot it down over a single provision that you don’t care for, you are the one shutting the government down. This is some awe inspiring verbal gymnastics. Perhaps I’ve been underestimating Warren all this time. She just might be enough of a politician to run for the Democrat nomination, because it takes some serious chutzpah to deliver a line like that with a straight face. http://hotair.com/ar...t-or-something/ . Edited December 11, 2014 by B-Man
Nanker Posted December 11, 2014 Author Posted December 11, 2014 With Professor George Lakoff of Berkeley as a talking points coach, we should expect that kind of verbal acrobatics.
Alaska Darin Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 One of the funniest things happening in the state right now is how the entertaininment industry is now shooting movies in other states. All these libs spend millions of dollars to put libs in office and push lib-loved taxes, and then decide it's too expensive to do work here and take it out of state. This is why it's a sanctuary state. In due time, they'll need to compensate for all the liberal votes, and nothing gets libs re-elected faster than handing out freebies and voting registration forms to illegal aliens. Interesting side note: in California, they're not called illegal aliens. They're called Raider fans. Don't worry, they're going to get a nice boost now that oil prices are dropping. Obama will (falsely) get credit for the economy's turnaround (low interest rates + low energy prices = better economy) and the cycle of stupidity will start anew.
OCinBuffalo Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 http://hosted.ap.org...-12-10-13-45-17 Hmmm.....well at least the AP is trying to regain some credibility. I think the media's new motto should be "Never Again", when it comes to vetting presidential candidates. Don't you? I mean we given them a lot of power, and what did they do with it? Give us an assclown who is currently voting "present" in the WH.
OCinBuffalo Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 Don't worry, they're going to get a nice boost now that oil prices are dropping. Obama will (falsely) get credit for the economy's turnaround (low interest rates + low energy prices = better economy) and the cycle of stupidity will start anew. I read an article that basically outlines this as the "new" D strategy. "Look how well the economy is doing". However, I disagree with you on it's effectivenes. We have a quick trigger finger when it comes to the economy. Ex: Clinton got elected. IF the Rs continue to do as good a job with messaging as they have, nobody will be allowed to forget the intentionally inflated oil prices, by this administration's EPA head, admitted to in open Congressional hearings. And, we've been through 6 years, not 6 months, of this economy, with Demcrats doing nothing, because of Harry Reid. I highly doubt things starting to get better will be easily associated to Democrats. What cause/effect can they point to? The Stimulus from 6 years ago? The "Summer of Recovery"? Besides real "better" isn't going to happen for 6 months, when Rs are fully in control of Congress....and can say "See?". Most likely, regardless of all the spin, people will come away with the truth: "This is America, things were always bound to get better. Regardless of Obama, or anybody, his leftist policies made it take longer". In fact, that would be the sound bite/talking point should use: no different than the one used against FDR, which entirely flipped Congress to Rs back then. Yet another episode of "Idiots in History".
Alaska Darin Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 I read an article that basically outlines this as the "new" D strategy. "Look how well the economy is doing". However, I disagree with you on it's effectivenes. We have a quick trigger finger when it comes to the economy. Ex: Clinton got elected. IF the Rs continue to do as good a job with messaging as they have, nobody will be allowed to forget the intentionally inflated oil prices, by this administration's EPA head, admitted to in open Congressional hearings. And, we've been through 6 years, not 6 months, of this economy, with Demcrats doing nothing, because of Harry Reid. I highly doubt things starting to get better will be easily associated to Democrats. What cause/effect can they point to? The Stimulus from 6 years ago? The "Summer of Recovery"? Besides real "better" isn't going to happen for 6 months, when Rs are fully in control of Congress....and can say "See?". Most likely, regardless of all the spin, people will come away with the truth: "This is America, things were always bound to get better. Regardless of Obama, or anybody, his leftist policies made it take longer". In fact, that would be the sound bite/talking point should use: no different than the one used against FDR, which entirely flipped Congress to Rs back then. Yet another episode of "Idiots in History". I don't know what planet you live on but the idiots who follow liberals don't care about facts in the least. The Republicans best strategy so far has been to fail at everything they've tried and let the Democrats be in charge for awhile.
OCinBuffalo Posted December 12, 2014 Posted December 12, 2014 (edited) I don't know what planet you live on but the idiots who follow liberals don't care about facts in the least. The Republicans best strategy so far has been to fail at everything they've tried and let the Democrats be in charge for awhile. You really can't connect the messaging the Rs have been doing, with the recent election results? If so, then I suppose it is folly to ask you to see that continuing that same messaging will produce the same results. And, like I said: history is on my side = FDR's economic fail = Repbulican Sweep of Congress. Edited December 12, 2014 by OCinBuffalo
B-Man Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 Hillary Wants To Be President, She Just Doesn't Want To Run by Daniel Greenfield Original Article
Azalin Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 All anyone running against her needs to do is keep running this clip on prime time television:
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 (edited) All anyone running against her needs to do is keep running this clip on prime time television: Not Liz Warren. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-P-CoSNYaI It's officially a race to the left. Edited December 15, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker
IDBillzFan Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 Hillary Wants To Be President, She Just Doesn't Want To Run by Daniel Greenfield Original Article Can you imagine if she loses the nomination to Warren? I'd donate to Warren's campaign just to see it happen.
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 Not Liz Warren. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-P-CoSNYaI It's officially a race to the left. So she's suggesting that companies pay taxes? She !@#$ing brilliant. And she got applause for that? What a bunch of dunderheads.
Recommended Posts