PDA

View Full Version : Elections MSNBC RICK PERRY POPS HIS CHERRY EXTRAVAGANZA DEBATE THREAD


banyon
09-07-2011, 06:03 PM
On now.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:05 PM
He better live up to his billing here.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:06 PM
And Brian williams tries to start a TX vs. MASS fight right off

Now it's private sector vs. public sector

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:09 PM
You're worse than Dukakis!

You're worse than W!

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:10 PM
Man. that guy is toast.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:11 PM
Man. that guy is toast.

Santorum?

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:14 PM
Santorum?

You know it.

"I'm from the government!"

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:15 PM
"Kids need jobs"

Great line, Bachmann.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:18 PM
Gingrich made me laugh.

"No, it means if he writes another book I'll write another foreword."

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:20 PM
Gingrich made me laugh.

"No, it means if he writes another book I'll write another foreword."

Yeah, typically whore answer. Completely honest, though.

Gingrich wants a position in the cabinet.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:23 PM
We're last in TX because of the Federal government (which operates in every other state too).

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:24 PM
We're last in TX because of the Federal government (which operates in every other state too).

:D

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 06:25 PM
It's too bad Huntsman is such a liberal. I'd vote for him in the general.

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:28 PM
I think Gingrich would make the best President. I like how he's refusing to go after the other candidates, for the most part.

I could vote for any of these guys, including Ron Paul, but of course, Ron Paul would be the last resort.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 06:28 PM
I'd vote for Gingrich too. He's won every debate so far.

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:29 PM
BTW, for anyone who doesn't know, this can be viewed on MSNBC's website.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:29 PM
You people like Gingrich? The fuck is wrong with you?

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:30 PM
I'd vote for Gingrich too. He's won every debate so far.

:spock:

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:30 PM
Rick Santorum

CHAMPION OF THE IMPOVERISHED

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:30 PM
It's too bad Huntsman is such a liberal. I'd vote for him in the general.

And by liberal, you mean because he said he trusts scientists when it comes to scientific findings?

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:31 PM
Rick Santorum

CHAMPION OF THE IMPOVERISHED

He transformed the welfare system, dude.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:31 PM
I think Gingrich would make the best President. I like how he's refusing to go after the other candidates, for the most part.

I could vote for any of these guys, including Ron Paul, but of course, Ron Paul would be the last resort.

Yeah, Perry had a big smile about that (I'm the front runner he hee, get this infightin' stuff squelched so I can sit on my lead).

Jaric
09-07-2011, 06:32 PM
Why is Rick Santorum still invited to these things?

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:32 PM
You people like Gingrich? The **** is wrong with you?

What's wrong with Gingrich? Are you against him because of his personal, social failings? I can understand that, but I can overlook it because he's an idea guy who I can trust to make smart decisions as POTUS. Kind of what liberals were bamboozled into thinking Obama was.

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:33 PM
Yeah, Perry had a big smile about that (I'm the front runner he hee, get this infightin' stuff squelched so I can sit on my lead).

No doubt.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 06:33 PM
And by liberal, you mean because he said he trusts scientists when it comes to scientific findings?

I don't give a shit about evolution beliefs. It's because he doesn't oppose raising taxes.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:34 PM
What's wrong with Gingrich? Are you against him because of his personal, social failings? I can understand that, but I can overlook it because he's an idea guy who I can trust to make smart decisions as POTUS. Kind of what liberals were bamboozled into thinking Obama was.

His complete, power-hungry fuckupery of the way Congress worked is a huge concern for me.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 06:34 PM
Come on let Paul speak.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 06:35 PM
JFC Huntsman is polling at 1% and getting more questions. FUCK

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:35 PM
People you can like and not be derided by me:

Cain, Huntsman, Romney, and Perry, and sometimes Ron Paul. The rest are unacceptable.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:36 PM
Huntsman would be the best pick in the General for the GOP

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:36 PM
JFC Huntsman is polling at 1% and getting more questions. FUCK

Hopefully he'll be up to 20% after tonight.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 06:37 PM
Beautiful.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:37 PM
Paul with the Perry cheap shot on Hillarycare

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:38 PM
Paul with the Perry cheap shot on Hillarycare

A little forced, though.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:38 PM
Ha Ha! Shut up Paul! We're cutting you off on a gallon of gas for a dime!

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:39 PM
His complete, power-hungry ****upery of the way Congress worked is a huge concern for me.

Of course, the complete, power-hungry ****upery of the way our country works doesn't make you reject the current POTUS though.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:39 PM
We have a thread about this, people.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 06:40 PM
Ha Ha! Shut up Paul! We're cutting you off on a gallon of gas for a dime!

And no surprise it went over your head.

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:41 PM
Huntsman would be the best pick in the General for the GOP

I think he'd be a fine candidate. Non-controversial enough to keep the focus on Obama's record, but conservative enough to move the country in a positive direction.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:44 PM
And no surprise it went over your head.

I was taking about the guy cutting him off, not his comment when he was allowed to finish.

But then again , you're quick to spike the ball on the 10 yard line aren't you?

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:45 PM
This is bringing a tear to my eye.

Nancy, we were all blessed to find him.

Reaper16
09-07-2011, 06:47 PM
What the fuck is this shit? I wanna see a debate not a Reagan circle jerk.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 06:48 PM
What the fuck is this shit? I wanna see a debate not a Reagan circle jerk.

Welcome to the GOP

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:48 PM
[/avoid Social Security Quote]

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:49 PM
Oh, nevermind, it's still a Ponzi scheme

patteeu
09-07-2011, 06:52 PM
I disagree with Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney. SS is a ponzi scheme.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:52 PM
The Chilean model?

IIRC, I don't think that's a good country to emulate there Mr. Cain.

banyon
09-07-2011, 06:59 PM
Chile rethinks its privatized pension system
By Larry Rohter
Published: Tuesday, January 10, 2006



SANTIAGO — Michelle Bachelet is a pediatrician and a Socialist, while Sebastián Piñera is a billionaire businessman and a conservative. They may agree on little as the opposing candidates in Chile's presidential election, but they concur on one important point: The country's much-vaunted and much-copied privatized pension system needs immediate repair.

The Chilean system of personalized accounts managed by private funds has inspired a score of other countries since the pioneer effort to create it here 25 years ago. It is endorsed by President George W. Bush, who has called it "a great example" from which the United States can "take some lessons." Here at home, though, dissatisfaction with the system has emerged as one of the hot-button issues in the election, a runoff that will take place Sunday.

"Most people perceive the costs of pensions and the pensions themselves as unfair," said Patricio Navia, a political science professor at New York University and at Diego Portales University here. "Many of those who started work when the system was first adopted are realizing that they have not been able to contribute enough to get a significant pension," Navia said. He added that they resent "overhead costs that are so high" and have led to record profits for the pension funds that manage contributions, which are automatically deducted from workers' paychecks.

Bachelet, the front-runner in the race, has described the pension system as being "in crisis" and promised to take steps to fix it. Among the ideas being considered in her camp are increasing and expanding the minimum pension as well as measures to allow individual contributors to "bundle" together into larger groups so as to be able to negotiate better terms with pension funds.

"There are two big issues, coverage and costs," Andrés Velasco, Bachelet's chief economic adviser, said in an interview here. "Too many people are outside the system," he said, and too many of those in the system have found that "saving via the pension funds is quite expensive."

According to a recent study here, Chile's pension funds, whose number has shrunk to six from more than 20 as competition has diminished, recorded an average annual profitability of more than 50 percent during a recent five-year period. Other studies, including one conducted by the World Bank, indicate that pension funds retain between a quarter and a third of workers' contributions in the form of commissions, insurance and other administrative fees.

At the moment, the government pays about 5 percent of gross domestic product, or more than it spends for either health or education, on pensions for the poor, payments into a separate military retirement plan, and so-called transition and administrative costs.

Supporters of the privatized system argue that the state's burden will diminish as older retirees enrolled in the pay-as-you-go system that prevailed here before 1981 gradually die off.

But skeptics point to another developing problem: Many young people, who should be enrolling in the system early to accrue maximum benefit, are staying out or paying in very little. Some cannot afford to contribute beyond the obligatory minimum payment, which is 10 percent of wages, while others are either self-employed or have been hired by companies as low-paid independent contract workers and thus do not have to contribute at all.

"The bottom line is that this system does not work with this labor market," said Andras Uthoff, an economist who is director of the social development division of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America here. If current trends continue, he added, "only a small percentage of people are going to be able to finance meaningful pensions. What happens then to the rest?"

As a result of such doubts, attacking the pension system and especially the perceived excesses of the funds has become a surefire source of votes. One of the big winners in the first round of the election last month, for example, was Guido Girardi, a senator-elect and Bachelet supporter who has taken upon himself the role of scourge of the private management funds.

"I am going to do away with these thieves in jackets and ties," Girardi said. "We are going to defend the citizenry from these funds that rob people of their pensions."

But even advocates of an untrammeled free market, like Piñera, the conservative candidate, are jumping in with criticisms, to the surprise of some here. Piñera is the brother of José Piñera, the former labor minister who imposed the personal-account system during the Pinochet dictatorship. In addition, Sebastián Piñera is backed by the large business groups that control the pension funds and have benefited from the expansion of investment capital the funds have provided.

"Chile's social security system requires deep reforms in all sectors, because half of Chileans have no pension coverage, and of those who do, 40 percent are going to find it hard to reach the minimum level," Piñera said in a televised debate with Bachelet on Wednesday. "This has to be confronted now, and we agree with Michelle Bachelet and will, I hope, join forces behind this large undertaking."

One of the changes Piñera has proposed is a guaranteed pension for housewives, which the Bachelet camp dismisses as populist posturing that will add to government expenditures. He also favors financial incentives to the poor, like matching government contributions, to encourage them to participate in the system; more bargaining power for consumers; and increased competition among the funds to force them to bring down their fees.

"We don't want to dismantle the system, we just want to improve it," said Felipe Larrain, Piñera's chief economic adviser. But "pensions are very low," he acknowledged.

Larrain said reform is "not just an issue of fixing the pension-fund management system because there are also people who cannot get an adequate pension" based on the contributions they are making.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/10/world/americas/10iht-chile.html

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:00 PM
Yeah Congressman Paul, Let's trust the airlines to do it because "they will treat people right".

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:03 PM
Yeah Congressman Paul, Let's trust the airlines to do it because "they will treat people right".

Because companies want to treat people bad to make money. You're a complete idiot.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:04 PM
Because companies want to treat people bad to make money. You're a complete idiot.

You think the airlines treat people well?

Have you ridden on an airplane lately?

You've fallen gullible to the dogma that money makes everything in the world better.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:05 PM
You think the airlines treat people well?

Have you ridden on an airplane lately?

They don't grope people.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:05 PM
Up to this point, if you think Ron Paul is a good candidate you should drink a cup of antifreeze.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:07 PM
You think the airlines treat people well?

Have you ridden on an airplane lately?

I flew 4 times last week. The airlines treat people well. The TSA doesn't in some cases, but I didn't have a problem with them (even though I kept getting picked out for additional searches. I even got picked out once right before boarding the plane. I had been through security for over an hour and was literally on the jetway when an agent stopped me.)

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:08 PM
Coming from an Independent, Romney is winning this. Probably won't be the case with Republicans though.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:08 PM
Up to this point, if you think Ron Paul is a good candidate you should drink a cup of antifreeze.

That would kill off all of 1% of the population.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:09 PM
They don't grope people.

That wasn't the point of course.

But you think they wouldn't if they were entrusted with security and there were no federal regulations or regulators to watch them?

Want some prime coastal property in Florida?

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:09 PM
Coming from an Independent, Romney is winning this. Probably won't be the case with Republicans though.

He's still the most polished on stage.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:10 PM
I flew 4 times last week. The airlines treat people well. The TSA doesn't in some cases, but I didn't have a problem with them (even though I kept getting picked out for additional searches. I even got picked out once right before boarding the plane. I had been through security for over an hour and was literally on the jetway when an agent stopped me.)

You haven't noticed airline service getting gradually crappier and crappier over the last 30 years?

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:12 PM
Huh -- an outburst of applause for English as the official language.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:13 PM
I could come to like Huntsman but he sounds like a politician. If that makes sense.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:16 PM
Cain is just weird.

kstater
09-07-2011, 07:18 PM
This is where Paul says legalizing Meth will reduce illegals.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:19 PM
Paul with the popular 'America might be your prison' angle.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:19 PM
Ron Paul:

The Border fence isn't to Keep them out, IT'S (GASP) TO KEEP US IN!!!

SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:19 PM
Nobody wants to go to Mexico dude.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:23 PM
Yes, we need shorter, less thoughtful answers. Good call NBC.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:25 PM
Balanced budget agreement will not work. Say what you will but no.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:26 PM
I like Huntman, maybe.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:27 PM
Huntsman stealing part of the Ron Paul vote after tonights awful showing.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:28 PM
I really like Romney. I hope he sticks. I could vote for him.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:30 PM
I really like Romney. I hope he sticks. I could vote for him.

And you say Paul supporters should drink antifreeze.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:31 PM
If Perry is going to run on the economy, it would help if he knew how to pronounce "Keynesian". Cayhn-se-an. Not Keen-ze-an.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:32 PM
And you say Paul supporters should drink antifreeze.

It was a statement towards his policies. They suck. By the way, go Huskers!

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:34 PM
You haven't noticed airline service getting gradually crappier and crappier over the last 30 years?

Nothing comes to mind, but I usually fly Southwest, and they kick ass. I had to fly American last week, andd they aren't as good. Charging for bags is bullshit, so I guess there's that. SW doesn't do that.

What's worse about it?

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:34 PM
It was a statement towards his policies. They suck. By the way, go Huskers!

I disagree we need less government.



GBR!

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:36 PM
There is his politician coming out. I like Huntsman but quit being a politician.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:37 PM
Rick Perry is tough to watch.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:38 PM
Nothing comes to mind, but I usually fly Southwest, and they kick ass. I had to fly American last week, andd they aren't as good. Charging for bags is bullshit, so I guess there's that. SW doesn't do that.

What's worse about it?

Used to get a meal and drinks, now you don't.

Used to get attendant who actually understood service.

Used not to get layovers constantly.

Used not to have to fly through a hub that has nothing to do with your actual destination (I've flown through Atlanta to get from Memphis to KC several times).

Used to have more room in the cabin for bags and your knees.

As you point out, used to be able to carryon/ check whatever without getting nickle and dimed.

Used to have multiple exits used rather than a mad dash for the one door and elbows swinging. (this is a hazy memory as a kid admittedly).

But, I find it strange that I bring up the deteriorating quality of ariline service and it's treated as controversial. I thought it was pretty widely understood that all of our airlines are circling the toilet.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:43 PM
Romney

No cap gains and dividend taxes for those under 200$k.

I like it, but won't republicans cry "Who said $200k is rich, who made ROmney God to decide if I'm too wealthy?"

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:44 PM
*Cheers for the executions*

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:45 PM
alnorth, there's your mainstream media scrutiny (Hell even MSNBC!) of Perry's death penalty cases.

He got an applause line out of it.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:46 PM
What the hell does "999" mean?

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:46 PM
Used to get a meal and drinks, now you don't.

Used to get attendant who actually understood service.

Used not to get layovers constantly.

Used not to have to fly through a hub that has nothing to do with your actual destination (I've flown through Atlanta to get from Memphis to KC several times).

Used to have more room in the cabin for bags and your knees.

As you point out, used to be able to carryon/ check whatever without getting nickle and dimed.

Used to have multiple exits used rather than a mad dash for the one door and elbows swinging. (this is a hazy memory as a kid admittedly).

But, I find it strange that I bring up the deteriorating quality of ariline service and it's treated as controversial. I thought it was pretty widely understood that all of our airlines are circling the toilet.

You're probably right, but I question whether airplanes really had multiple non-emergency exits. As for the food, airline food was the brunt of a lot of jokes in the past, and I know I don't miss it. I can go 2 hours without a meal.

The hubs thing just makes better business sense. You can pay for direct flights from certain airlines, but most people would rather not pay for it.

Maybe I'm an outlier, but I think its fine. Just get me where I need to be, and I'm cool.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:46 PM
What the hell does "999" mean?

9% personal tax, corporate tax, sales tax

You know, to uh, simply the code and stuff.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:49 PM
I think Paul is a good man, I think Paul has no idea how to be a good POTUS.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:49 PM
9% personal tax, corporate tax, sales tax

You know, to uh, simply the code and stuff.

Oh, ok.

Are Federal Tax receipts going to be 999 bucks also?

petegz28
09-07-2011, 07:50 PM
Nothing comes to mind, but I usually fly Southwest, and they kick ass. I had to fly American last week, andd they aren't as good. Charging for bags is bullshit, so I guess there's that. SW doesn't do that.

What's worse about it?

Southwest sucks. They have gotten worse over the years. And yes, other airlines charge for bags but it seems like other airlines have cheaper tickets so it all comes out in the wash. The cattle hearding mentality Southwest has taken has went from good to bad.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:50 PM
Romney

No cap gains and dividend taxes for those under 200$k.

I like it, but won't republicans cry "Who said $200k is rich, who made ROmney God to decide if I'm too wealthy?"

I'm starting to become receptive to the idea of increasing taxes on the wealthy as part of a compromise involving spending cuts. I don't know that $200,000 is the magic number, but I'm open to it.

banyon
09-07-2011, 07:52 PM
I'm starting to become receptive to the idea of increasing taxes on the wealthy as part of a compromise involving spending cuts. I don't know that $200,000 is the magic number, but I'm open to it.

I'm 1000% behind modest tax cut rollbacks on the people who can most afford it to help offset spending cuts to actually make headway on the deficit.

That used to be a position firmly in the middle of the Republican firmament. Now if anyone holds it, they are treated like lepers.

BigRichard
09-07-2011, 07:52 PM
Newt isn't bad. I don't get the hate for him.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:53 PM
Southwest sucks. They have gotten worse over the years. And yes, other airlines charge for bags but it seems like other airlines have cheaper tickets so it all comes out in the wash. The cattle hearding mentality Southwest has taken has went from good to bad.

Southwest usually has the cheapest tickets. Its GA seating, and I'm good with that. You don't get assigned seats on subways, trains, etc. Why do you need them on an airplane.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 07:53 PM
And Saul calls himself a conservative.........

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:53 PM
I'm starting to become receptive to the idea of increasing taxes on the wealthy as part of a compromise involving spending cuts. I don't know that $200,000 is the magic number, but I'm open to it.

Welcome to the dark side, comrade.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:55 PM
I'm 1000% behind modest tax cut rollbacks on the people who can most afford it to help offset spending cuts to actually make headway on the deficit.

That used to be a position firmly in the middle of the Republican firmament. Now if anyone holds it, they are treated like lepers.

Its called a tax increase. You can say it.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:56 PM
Welcome to the dark side, comrade.

I'm not on your side on this issue. Its just something I'm willing to give up in exchange for other gains.

petegz28
09-07-2011, 07:57 PM
Southwest usually has the cheapest tickets. Its GA seating, and I'm good with that. You don't get assigned seats on subways, trains, etc. Why do you need them on an airplane.

Because it is a lot easier to board a subway?

KILLER_CLOWN
09-07-2011, 07:57 PM
Pretty much total fail in this thread. Love for Gingrich? If anyone is unelectable it's newt. I can't tell the difference between the conservatives and liberals here.

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 07:58 PM
I'm not on your side on this issue. Its just something I'm willing to give up in exchange for other gains.

This is chiefsplanet. You're a socialist. You used to love freedom, but now you hate America.

petegz28
09-07-2011, 07:58 PM
I'm 1000% behind modest tax cut rollbacks on the people who can most afford it to help offset spending cuts to actually make headway on the deficit.

That used to be a position firmly in the middle of the Republican firmament. Now if anyone holds it, they are treated like lepers.

My entire argument about that has been I want to see serious spedning cuts first. Then we can talk taxes. I am tired of the you give now we will promise to give later bullshit.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 07:58 PM
Because it is a lot easier to board a subway?

It loads and unloads in 15 seconds. Yes, its much easier. Also, Southwest only flies 737s. That's great. Puddle-jumpers suck.

BucEyedPea
09-07-2011, 08:00 PM
I think Gingrich would make the best President. I like how he's refusing to go after the other candidates, for the most part.

LMAO But it's okay to go after Obama daily. :hmmm:

banyon
09-07-2011, 08:01 PM
Ugh, the after commentary.

Sharpton:

Perry? What was that with the science and Ponzi and Galeo? (sp. phonetically, assume he means Gallileo, who was not discussed as far as I can remember).

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 08:02 PM
LMAO But it's okay to go after Obama daily. :hmmm:

Your non sequitirs have become downright Frankie.

banyon
09-07-2011, 08:02 PM
My entire argument about that has been I want to see serious spedning cuts first. Then we can talk taxes. I am tired of the you give now we will promise to give later bullshit.

That's silly. Give the Republicans exactly what they want, just trust them, and then next time, they will give us what we want.


Yeah, right.

petegz28
09-07-2011, 08:03 PM
Ugh, the after commentary.

Sharpton:

Perry? What was that with the science and Ponzi and Galeo? (sp. phonetically, assume he means Gallileo, who was not discussed as far as I can remember).

Gallileo was mentioned when he was saying that until the science on climate changed is settled we cannot put the economy at risk. His point being just because some scientists make certian claims that doesn't mean they are right and even Gallileo was outvoted for a while.

petegz28
09-07-2011, 08:05 PM
That's silly. Give the Republicans exactly what they want, just trust them, and then next time, they will give us what we want.


Yeah, right.

So give the Dems what they want and trust them? If I have to pick a side I pick spending cuts first.

Tha tbeing said, the whole argument about tax hikes to help the deficit is bunk. We need job growth. You want to increase revenue, increase the number of people paying taxes, not the amount of taxes people pay.

banyon
09-07-2011, 08:05 PM
Gallileo was mentioned when he was saying that until the science on climate changed is settled we cannot put the economy at risk. His point being just because some scientists make certian claims that doesn't mean they are right and even Gallileo was outvoted for a while.

He was excommunicated and placed under house arrest.

But the sun did not revolve around the earth.

dirk digler
09-07-2011, 08:06 PM
I thought this debate was boring compared to the one on Fox News. I thought Romney did good and I could see myself voting for him along with Huntsman.

BucEyedPea
09-07-2011, 08:09 PM
Pretty much total fail in this thread. Love for Gingrich? If anyone is unelectable it's newt. I can't tell the difference between the conservatives and liberals here.

And he's a World Govt man in the closet. I thought patteeu said at one point between 2006 and now that he couldn't be trusted. He can't. He just knows what to say.

petegz28
09-07-2011, 08:09 PM
He was excommunicated and placed under house arrest.

But the sun did not revolve around the earth.

That's the point, banyon. The controling powers swore the earth revolved aroud the sun. Just like the controling powers want us to believe man is melting the earth.

banyon
09-07-2011, 08:13 PM
That's the point, banyon. The controling powers swore the earth revolved aroud the sun. Just like the controling powers want us to believe man is melting the earth.

Really the controlling powers?

It's a new theory that challenged our existing understanding. Heliocentrism wasn't the established theory, it was also the new theory, challenging the existing paradigm.

If, as Perry says, things aren't yet settled, then No GW is the existing paradigm, and GW is the changing paradigm.

Dave Lane
09-07-2011, 08:15 PM
I disagree with Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney. SS is a ponzi scheme.

You disagree with Dick Cheney? Alert the media!

petegz28
09-07-2011, 08:15 PM
Really the controlling powers?

It's a new theory that challenged our existing understanding. Heliocentrism wasn't the established theory, it was also the new theory, challenging the existing paradigm.

If, as Perry says, things aren't yet settled, then No GW is the existing paradigm, and GW is the changing paradigm.

Again, he said AGW, not GW. GW is happening but are we the cause? I tend to doubt it.

Interesting article for you to read...

Magnetic Pole Shift & Climate Change
http://www.vorchester.com/vnews/?p=12

BucEyedPea
09-07-2011, 08:15 PM
Gallileo was mentioned when he was saying that until the science on climate changed is settled we cannot put the economy at risk. His point being just because some scientists make certian claims that doesn't mean they are right and even Gallileo was outvoted for a while.

Well Galileo made a major stumble and error on the tides and he propounded on it most of his life even. On the sun not revolving around the earth was proposed by others much earlier, as far back as 350 BC.

petegz28
09-07-2011, 08:19 PM
Well Galileo made a major stumble and error on the tides and he propounded on it most of his life even. On the sun not revolving around the earth was proposed by others much earlier, as far back as 350 BC.

History is full of incidents of people being punished for scientifically disagreeing with what the controlling powers want people to believe. I disagree with banyon. I think there is a large part of our controlling powers that want us to believe man is melting the earth and they do what they can to shut down thos who say otherwise.

go bowe
09-07-2011, 08:26 PM
History is full of incidents of people being punished for scientifically disagreeing with what the controlling powers want people to believe. I disagree with banyon. I think there is a large part of our controlling powers that want us to believe man is melting the earth and they do what they can to shut down thos who say otherwise.

teedubya, is that you?

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 08:39 PM
So what's the takeaway from this debate?

I'm getting the sense that Romney was the most impressive, Perry was solid, if unspectacular, and did enough not to hurt himself, and the two of them probably distanced themselves further from the pack.

Sounds like Paul, Bachmann, Cain, etc. were non-factors while Huntsman was impressive, maybe doing the best job of emerging from the also-rans into a potentially viable candidate, and Newt had some good soundbites but didn't exactly do anything to put himself into contention.

Is that a fair synopsis?

dirk digler
09-07-2011, 08:46 PM
So what's the takeaway from this debate?

I'm getting the sense that Romney was the most impressive, Perry was solid, if unspectacular, and did enough not to hurt himself, and the two of them probably distanced themselves further from the pack.

Sounds like Paul, Bachmann, Cain, etc. were non-factors while Huntsman was impressive, maybe doing the best job of emerging from the also-rans into a potentially viable candidate, and Newt had some good soundbites but didn't exactly do anything to put himself into contention.

Is that a fair synopsis?

I think you are close but I think the SS ponzi scheme reference by Perry hurts him significantly.

Andrew Sullivan sums it up pretty good as well...

My take-away? Perry has proved himself an extreme, inarticulate, incurious W clone. He doubled down on the vicious attacks on social security; and his rhetoric was off-key. Huntsman emerged as an actual candidate; Romney kicked ass. Bachmann is wearing thinner and thinner. Paul is Paul. Santorum is a Vatican crank. Gingrich is an angry old man. Cain has no business being up there. Perry's poor performance gives Palin an opening. And an actual argument that people can understand about economic policy did not emerge.

BucEyedPea
09-07-2011, 08:47 PM
History is full of incidents of people being punished for scientifically disagreeing with what the controlling powers want people to believe.
I know. That wasn't my point. My point was science has a long line of mistakes too. That even Galileo made a mistake in a key area so he wasn't always right.

Then there's this...quite a good lesson on how scientists also lie. A bit long but it gets real good. He teaches you how to look through scientific clinical and observational studies. It's applied to diet and nutrition science but the same principals apply.

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/y1RXvBveht0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I disagree with banyon. I think there is a large part of our controlling powers that want us to believe man is melting the earth and they do what they can to shut down thos who say otherwise.
I agree with you here.

Saul Good
09-07-2011, 09:01 PM
I think you are close but I think the SS ponzi scheme reference by Perry hurts him significantly.

Andrew Sullivan sums it up pretty good as well...

I don't think Perry's fans are going to be turned off by the Ponzi scheme comment. He's completely correct.

That said, Romney may be in perfect position to let Perry take the flak and emerge as the winner in the end, drafting so to speak.

Palin is the wild card in all of this. I really hope she does what she does best; be a lightning rod, fire up the base, raise money, and stay the hell away from the election.

2bikemike
09-07-2011, 09:02 PM
Used to get a meal and drinks, now you don't.

Used to get attendant who actually understood service.

Used not to get layovers constantly.

Used not to have to fly through a hub that has nothing to do with your actual destination (I've flown through Atlanta to get from Memphis to KC several times).

Used to have more room in the cabin for bags and your knees.

As you point out, used to be able to carryon/ check whatever without getting nickle and dimed.

Used to have multiple exits used rather than a mad dash for the one door and elbows swinging. (this is a hazy memory as a kid admittedly).

But, I find it strange that I bring up the deteriorating quality of ariline service and it's treated as controversial. I thought it was pretty widely understood that all of our airlines are circling the toilet.

I couldn't agree with you more. I flat out refuse to fly unless I absolutely have to. Other than the dumb ass false security measures I am sick and tired of being crammed into a freaking seat with no leg room, fighting for room for the one bag I do bring on the airplane. The whole experience sucks. And I used to love to fly.

dirk digler
09-07-2011, 09:12 PM
I don't think Perry's fans are going to be turned off by the Ponzi scheme comment. He's completely correct.

That said, Romney may be in perfect position to let Perry take the flak and emerge as the winner in the end, drafting so to speak.

Palin is the wild card in all of this. I really hope she does what she does best; be a lightning rod, fire up the base, raise money, and stay the hell away from the election.

I don't believe SS is a Ponzi scheme but the rest of your post is spot on.

go bowe
09-07-2011, 10:15 PM
I don't think Perry's fans are going to be turned off by the Ponzi scheme comment. He's completely correct.

That said, Romney may be in perfect position to let Perry take the flak and emerge as the winner in the end, drafting so to speak.

Palin is the wild card in all of this. I really hope she does what she does best; be a lightning rod, fire up the base, raise money, and stay the hell away from the election.

of course his fans love it, it's the rest of the people who think social security is still a good idea (even though it does need to be reformed) who won't vote for him in the general election...

Jenson71
09-07-2011, 10:20 PM
So what's the takeaway from this debate?

I'm getting the sense that Romney was the most impressive, Perry was solid, if unspectacular, and did enough not to hurt himself, and the two of them probably distanced themselves further from the pack.

Sounds like Paul, Bachmann, Cain, etc. were non-factors while Huntsman was impressive, maybe doing the best job of emerging from the also-rans into a potentially viable candidate, and Newt had some good soundbites but didn't exactly do anything to put himself into contention.

Is that a fair synopsis?

That is a very accurate read of my own feelings. Perry was unimpressive, but I think solid is fair.

Reaper16
09-07-2011, 10:23 PM
Huntsman seems like a legit human to me.

Hoover
09-07-2011, 10:31 PM
Romney lost this debate because he now sounds like Obama and the Democrats when attacking Perry on Social Security. The system is broke, but at least Perry is willing to admit it.

patteeu
09-07-2011, 10:40 PM
Romney

No cap gains and dividend taxes for those under 200$k.

I like it, but won't republicans cry "Who said $200k is rich, who made ROmney God to decide if I'm too wealthy?"

Yeah, I don't like that kind of two tiered system.

SNR
09-07-2011, 10:42 PM
Huntsman seems like a legit human to me.So many Democrats who are pissed at Obama would easily jump ship and vote for Huntsman. He'd also gain quite a few independents.

If the Republicans want to beat Obama, they'll nominate Huntsman.

patteeu
09-07-2011, 10:45 PM
LMAO But it's okay to go after Obama daily. :hmmm:

:spock: Of course it is. Defeating him is the ultimate goal. Weakening other Republicans might benefit an individual candidate, but it damages the effort to get rid of Obama. I'm not applauding Newt's approach because it's gentlemanly.

Chocolate Hog
09-07-2011, 11:23 PM
:spock: Of course it is. Defeating him is the ultimate goal. Weakening other Republicans might benefit an individual candidate, but it damages the effort to get rid of Obama. I'm not applauding Newt's approach because it's gentlemanly.

Like I said I think Newts won all the debates so far but I don't like the that approach. We need to kick out the big government Republicans. I don't like Newt as a person or alot of his positions. However he is a conservative intellect and he's someone conservatives need around. His kissing ass of Perry seemed like he was positioning for a cabinet position.

The Rick
09-08-2011, 05:07 AM
I kind of like Herman Cain and although I don't see him as a great candidate, he's good in a breath of fresh air kind of way.

That said, am I the only one who pictures the "FIX IT!" character from Weekend Update on SNL when he speaks?

ROFL

mlyonsd
09-08-2011, 06:40 AM
Two person race now.

(stay down palin, don't even think about it)

BucEyedPea
09-08-2011, 06:55 AM
"The thug Perry tries to muscle Ron during a commercial break in the 'debate'--unsuccessfully, of course." (Via Reddit)

http://i.imgur.com/PMSBK.jpg


Link (http://www.lewrockwell.com/politicaltheatre/2011/09/stop-telling-the-truth-about-me/)

Deberg_1990
09-08-2011, 07:01 AM
I don't think Perry's fans are going to be turned off by the Ponzi scheme comment. He's completely correct.



Alot of voters are going to be turned off by that. Most agree Social Security is broken, but nobody wants to get rid of the program and lose money either....

Donger
09-08-2011, 07:21 AM
Ron Paul:

The Border fence isn't to Keep them out, IT'S (GASP) TO KEEP US IN!!!

SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!

LMAO

I was making dinner when I thought I heard him say that. Had to rewind to make sure.

The Rick
09-08-2011, 07:28 AM
Some of my thoughts on the debate last night:

1. I had high expectations for Perry last night. Not sure why, maybe from all the hype. To be honest though, I wasn't very impressed.

2. I was impressed with Romney, Gingrich, and Huntsman. Huntsman surprised me the most. I thought he answered well and carried himself well. He lacks the necessary charisma though.

3. I like Ron Paul for the most part and a lot of his ideas, but I don't think he had a good debate last night at all. In my opinion, he really hurt himself with his bit on the "fence being used to keep us in".

4. I still think of the character from Weekend Update on SNL whenever Herman Cain talks. I keep waiting for him to start yelling "FIX IT!"

5. Just going to throw something out here, but is it at all possible that MSNBC could conspire to influence the outcome of the debate? It just sort of got the feeling like they were lobbing softballs to Huntsman, viciously attacking Perry and Romney, and barely acknowledging everyone else. I've heard that Huntsman would be the most palatable candidate amongst liberals. Maybe I'm reading too much in to it and giving them too much credit, but it seemed a little strange.

Deberg_1990
09-08-2011, 07:34 AM
Some of my thoughts on the debate last night:

1. I had high expectations for Perry last night. Not sure why, maybe from all the hype. To be honest though, I wasn't very impressed.

2. I was impressed with Romney, Gingrich, and Huntsman. Huntsman surprised me the most. I thought he answered well and carried himself well. He lacks the necessary charisma though.

3. I like Ron Paul for the most part and a lot of his ideas, but I don't think he had a good debate last night at all. In my opinion, he really hurt himself with his bit on the "fence being used to keep us in".

4. I still think of the character from Weekend Update on SNL whenever Herman Cain talks. I keep waiting for him to start yelling "FIX IT!"

5. Just going to throw something out here, but is it at all possible that MSNBC could conspire to influence the outcome of the debate? It just sort of got the feeling like they were lobbing softballs to Huntsman, viciously attacking Perry and Romney, and barely acknowledging everyone else. I've heard that Huntsman would be the most palatable candidate amongst liberals. Maybe I'm reading too much in to it and giving them too much credit, but it seemed a little strange.

For whatever reason, Ron Paul didn seem entirely comfortable to me last night, maybe that forum isnt his strong suit?

I liked how Herman Cain jumped in after Perry and offered up a solution to Social Security instead of just denouncing it.

Saul Good
09-08-2011, 08:09 AM
Alot of voters are going to be turned off by that. Most agree Social Security is broken, but nobody wants to get rid of the program and lose money either....

I didn't hear him say that it needs to be abolished. It certainly needs an overhaul, though.

HonestChieffan
09-08-2011, 08:15 AM
I didn't hear him say that it needs to be abolished. It certainly needs an overhaul, though.


He didn't have to say it. The left will spin anything to some outlandish extreme. No one wants to do away with SS in fact most want to make it more solvent for the next generation who is now paying the bill. BUT that will get spun as the R's want to take it away, starve old folk, and kill medicare allowing the streets to fill with the dying and dead.

LOCOChief
09-08-2011, 08:32 AM
So many Democrats who are pissed at Obama would easily jump ship and vote for Huntsman. He'd also gain quite a few independents.

If the Republicans want to beat Obama, they'll nominate Huntsman.

LMAO

SNR
09-08-2011, 09:06 AM
LMAO
1. I know conservatives don't like Huntsman, but what the fuck are they doing to do? Vote for Obama?

2. A HUGE portion of Democrats are pissed at Obama, and a guy like Huntsman is exactly who they would jump ship and vote for. He's got the resume they crave- something Obama never had.

Can you tell me how I'm wrong?

Fishpicker
09-08-2011, 09:37 AM
caption this pic
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/1021/20110908debate.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/831/20110908debate.jpg/)

BucEyedPea
09-08-2011, 09:44 AM
caption this pic
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/1021/20110908debate.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/831/20110908debate.jpg/)

"Hey, I'm warning you, I'll execute you if you tell the truth about me!" LMAO

BucEyedPea
09-08-2011, 09:49 AM
Some of my thoughts on the debate last night:

1. I had high expectations for Perry last night. Not sure why, maybe from all the hype. To be honest though, I wasn't very impressed.

I actually liked him more than the rest although I won't vote for him.

2. I was impressed with Romney, Gingrich, and Huntsman. Huntsman surprised me the most. I thought he answered well and carried himself well. He lacks the necessary charisma though.
Figures, you like the more liberal Rs. ( save for Huntsman.)

3. I like Ron Paul for the most part and a lot of his ideas, but I don't think he had a good debate last night at all. In my opinion, he really hurt himself with his bit on the "fence being used to keep us in".
I liked that part. I think what hurt him more is that he was largely ignored and never gets the right questions directed at him to show how he is with the large majority of Americans on these wars we're in and his views on jobs and the economy.


5. Just going to throw something out here, but is it at all possible that MSNBC could conspire to influence the outcome of the debate?
Yes, I think this could definitely be the case.

It just sort of got the feeling like they were lobbing softballs to Huntsman, viciously attacking Perry and Romney, and barely acknowledging everyone else.


I had the same impression.

patteeu
09-08-2011, 09:50 AM
"You seem dizzy and confused, old timer. Try to follow my finger."

orange
09-08-2011, 10:16 AM
caption this pic
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/1021/20110908debate.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/831/20110908debate.jpg/)

When I left you, I was but the learner; now I am the master.

KILLER_CLOWN
09-08-2011, 10:17 AM
When I left you, I was but the learner; now I am the master.

you forgot to ad Bater.

orange
09-08-2011, 10:22 AM
I didn't hear him say that it needs to be abolished. It certainly needs an overhaul, though.

How do you fix an unconstitutional Ponzi scheme? Seriously.

Does he even have a plan?

KILLER_CLOWN
09-08-2011, 10:28 AM
How do you fix an unconstitutional Ponzi scheme? Seriously.

Does he even have a plan?

Yes his plan is to throw the election for your buddy the Barachnid.

Jaric
09-08-2011, 10:39 AM
How do you fix an unconstitutional Ponzi scheme? Seriously.

Does he even have a plan?

The Obama Jobs speech thread is here (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=249431)

orange
09-08-2011, 10:47 AM
The Obama Jobs speech thread is here (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=249431)

That may well be, but THIS is the thread about Rick Perry at the debate. And I asked if Rick Perry has a Social Security plan because it sounds to me like he wants to abolish it.

Two people here asserted that he doesn't really want to; that he wants to reform it. And I simply asked "how."

Is this like Ron Paul defenders? - "Oh, he doesn't really mean the kooky parts, that's just for show."

Saul Good
09-08-2011, 10:51 AM
That may well be, but THIS is the thread about Rick Perry at the debate. And I asked if Rick Perry has a Social Security plan because it sounds to me like he wants to abolish it.

Two people here asserted that he doesn't really want to; that he wants to reform it. And I simply asked "how."

Is this like Ron Paul defenders? - "Oh, he doesn't really mean the kooky parts, that's just for show."

I'm not carrying water for Rick Perry, so he can lay out a plan if he has one. I'm just saying that I didn't hear him call for it to be abolished.

alnorth
09-08-2011, 11:02 AM
I didn't hear him say that it needs to be abolished. It certainly needs an overhaul, though.

He calls for abolishing social security in his book, a book which he has doubled down on and stood behind. The only concessions he's given so far are maybe the elderly should be grandfathered in, but he'd get rid of the federal pension and let the states offer one, or not offer one if they choose not to.

Karl Rove didn't pull his warning about Perry's unelectability out of his ass, Rick "Sharron Angle" Perry is pretty far out there and would lose handily to Obama.

Donger
09-08-2011, 11:07 AM
He calls for abolishing social security in his book

He does? Where?

Saul Good
09-08-2011, 11:11 AM
He calls for abolishing social security in his book, a book which he has doubled down on and stood behind. The only concessions he's given so far are maybe the elderly should be grandfathered in, but he'd get rid of the federal pension and let the states offer one, or not offer one if they choose not to.

Karl Rove didn't pull his warning about Perry's unelectability out of his ass, Rick "Sharron Angle" Perry is pretty far out there and would lose handily to Obama.

Interesting. I can't shake the notion that Perry is this year's Huckabee.1

orange
09-08-2011, 11:21 AM
The Constitution says that “the Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes… to provide for the… general Welfare of the United States.” But I noticed that when you quoted this section on page 116, you left “general welfare” out and put an ellipsis in its place. Progressives would say that “general welfare” includes things like Social Security or Medicare—that it gives the government the flexibility to tackle more than just the basic responsibilities laid out explicitly in our founding document. What does “general welfare” mean to you?

[PERRY:] I don’t think our founding fathers when they were putting the term “general welfare” in there were thinking about a federally operated program of pensions nor a federally operated program of health care. What they clearly said was that those were issues that the states need to address. Not the federal government. I stand very clear on that. From my perspective, the states could substantially better operate those programs if that’s what those states decided to do.

So in your view those things fall outside of general welfare. But what falls inside of it? What did the Founders mean by “general welfare”?

[PERRY:] I don’t know if I’m going to sit here and parse down to what the Founding Fathers thought general welfare meant.

But you just said what you thought they didn’t mean by general welfare. So isn’t it fair to ask what they did mean? It’s in the Constitution.

[Silence.]

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/08/12/294753/rick-perry-says-social-security-and-medicare-are-unconstitutional/


Though many have wondered if there was any policy position too extreme for the modern Republican Party, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) has found one: abolishing Social Security.

During Wednesday night’s GOP presidential debate in Simi Valley, California, Perry repeated his pronouncement that Social Security is both a “Ponzi scheme” and a “monstrous lie.” This follows up on Perry’s own book, in which he says the popular retirement program is unconstitutional and “violently toss[es] aside any respect for our founding principles.”

After the debate, one of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s (R) top advisers, Stuart Stevens, discussed the matter with ThinkProgress and others. Stevens minced no words, declaring that if the Texas governor were to win the nomination, Democrats would see major gains in Congress because every Republican candidate in the country “would have to run on the Perry plan to kill Social Security.” After noting that “the vast majority of Americans” did not want any major changes to Social Security – 64 percent according to a CNN poll, including 57 percent of Republicans – Stevens called the Perry platform of wanting to “abolish Social Security” a “disqualifying position.”

STEVENS: We’re talking about every House candidate that runs, every Senate candidate that runs, would have to run on the Perry plan to kill Social Security. We might as well just admit it now that Nancy Pelosi is going to become Speaker again and the Senate we’ll never get. It’s a position that, in his book he argues for and reasons out well, it’s just a position the vast majority of Americans don’t agree with. We’re talking about a president who will abolish Social Security. It’s not a question of how it’s funded, it’s a disqualifying position.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/08/314128/mitt-romney-rick-perry-abolish-social-security-disqualifying/

orange
09-08-2011, 11:29 AM
So I'm thinking, "why not hear from the horse's mouth?" So I go to his campaign website, to the issues page.

Apparently his dog ate his homework. http://www.rickperry.org/issues/

:facepalm:

alnorth
09-08-2011, 11:31 AM
He does? Where?

After doing a bit of quick research to refresh my memory, it looks like Perry didn't put everything he's said in the last year into his book, but it doesn't make him less unelectable.

His book strongly suggests, without just outright saying it, that he believed Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional. (if it is unconstitutional, obviously you would also think it should be abolished) During interviews for his book, back when Perry still thought he would never run for president, he wasn't shy about clarifying that those programs are unconstitutional.

Perry the presidential candidate, just a year later, is now trying to walk that stance back. He now apparently has changed his mind and no longer thinks it is unconstitutional.

Regarding abolishing social security and replacing it with state-level pension programs, that was apparently not in his book, but it was an idea he threw out there in at least one interview and at least one speech in Iowa, recently as a candidate, as one possible solution.

Donger
09-08-2011, 11:36 AM
After doing a bit of quick research to refresh my memory, it looks like Perry didn't put everything he's said in the last year into his book, but it doesn't make him less unelectable.

His book strongly suggests, without just outright saying it, that he believed Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional. (if it is unconstitutional, obviously you would also think it should be abolished) During interviews for his book, back when Perry still thought he would never run for president, he wasn't shy about clarifying that those programs are unconstitutional.

Perry the presidential candidate, just a year later, is now trying to walk that stance back. He now apparently has changed his mind and no longer thinks it is unconstitutional.

Regarding abolishing social security and replacing it with state-level pension programs, that was apparently not in his book, but it was an idea he threw out there in at least one interview and at least one speech in Iowa, recently as a candidate, as one possible solution.

Okay, but I think I'll wait until he presents a plan.

alnorth
09-08-2011, 11:49 AM
Okay, but I think I'll wait until he presents a plan.

Fair enough, but there is a treasure trove of hilariously unpopular words and video clips available for Obama's team. If Perry is nominated, he will angle this election in favor of the Democrats.

an·gle verb \ˈaŋ-gəl\
Origin: slang

1) The act of losing an election to an unpopular opponent or party, most often used when the losing candidate was nominated instead of a candidate who would have likely won the election. <.I can't believe the Republicans nominated O'Donnell instead of Castle; she is going to angle that election.>

Donger
09-08-2011, 11:57 AM
Fair enough, but there is a treasure trove of hilariously unpopular words and video clips available for Obama's team. If Perry is nominated, he will angle this election in favor of the Democrats.

an·gle verb \ˈaŋ-gəl\
Origin: slang

1) The act of losing an election to an unpopular opponent or party, most often used when the losing candidate was nominated instead of a candidate who would have likely won the election. <.I can't believe the Republicans nominated O'Donnell instead of Castle; she is going to angle that election.>

I think it's WAY too early to declare that Perry can't win versus Obama.

BucEyedPea
09-08-2011, 12:18 PM
http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/am4QsluiVVK9H07wJ2UYbA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0zNzk7cT04NTt3PTUxMg--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/ccd41ac132d32114f80e6a706700d7fa.jpg

mlyonsd
09-08-2011, 12:33 PM
Who is the orange guy?

SNR
09-08-2011, 12:48 PM
Who is the orange guy?An oompa loompa?

Calcountry
09-08-2011, 01:18 PM
You people like Obama? The **** is wrong with you?Gingrich Pwned in 1994

Calcountry
09-08-2011, 01:19 PM
Who is the orange guy?He is an Oompah Loompah.

alnorth
09-08-2011, 03:12 PM
I think it's WAY too early to declare that Perry can't win versus Obama.

No, its not. Very few, if any, republican presidential candidates have been this far out there on entitlements. I'm comfortable saying that Perry is unelectable. Republican candidates may try to be vague and disguise their plans until they win, hoping a future congress will let them reveal the "tough choices" that must be made, but they don't campaign on it, ESPECIALLY in a recession when more people are out of work and tend to depend on the government.

The current polling reflects the electorate's ignorance on where Perry stands on entitlements. I'll say it now, and etch it into the permanent record: Governor Rick Perry will not defeat President Barack Obama. Period.

Doesn't matter if Obama has a net approval of minus 5 or even minus 10, he may lose to Romney, but he would still win that match against Perry without too much trouble. Any Republican who boldly and loudly campaigns on severe Medicare and Social Security cuts is going to be killed in a general election.

If you want significant entitlement reform, that is only going to happen if you get cover from the Democrats, and they won't provide that cover without tax increases.

SNR
09-08-2011, 03:17 PM
Is there a fucking echo in here?

orange
09-08-2011, 06:00 PM
Fair enough, but there is a treasure trove of hilariously unpopular words and video clips available for Obama's team. If Perry is nominated, he will angle this election in favor of the Democrats.

an·gle verb \ˈaŋ-gəl\
Origin: slang

1) The act of losing an election to an unpopular opponent or party, most often used when the losing candidate was nominated instead of a candidate who would have likely won the election. <.I can't believe the Republicans nominated O'Donnell instead of Castle; she is going to angle that election.>

So, did Angle O'Donnell her election?

p.s. Sneaky little white space. I'll have to remember that one

ROYC75
09-08-2011, 08:01 PM
No, its not. Very few, if any, republican presidential candidates have been this far out there on entitlements. I'm comfortable saying that Perry is unelectable. Republican candidates may try to be vague and disguise their plans until they win, hoping a future congress will let them reveal the "tough choices" that must be made, but they don't campaign on it, ESPECIALLY in a recession when more people are out of work and tend to depend on the government.

The current polling reflects the electorate's ignorance on where Perry stands on entitlements. I'll say it now, and etch it into the permanent record: Governor Rick Perry will not defeat President Barack Obama. Period.

Doesn't matter if Obama has a net approval of minus 5 or even minus 10, he may lose to Romney, but he would still win that match against Perry without too much trouble. Any Republican who boldly and loudly campaigns on severe Medicare and Social Security cuts is going to be killed in a general election.

If you want significant entitlement reform, that is only going to happen if you get cover from the Democrats, and they won't provide that cover without tax increases.

Still a long ways to the General election. Many things could / will happen before then.

Cave Johnson
09-09-2011, 11:14 AM
Is it even possible to eat a corndog in a hetrosexual manner?

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7457/perryli.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/163/perryli.jpg/)