2020 Election
Quote: petroglyphWhat crime is it that you think he is guilty of? Any specifics?
The one he was convicted and pardoned for, maybe?
Quote: rxwineHe's a convicted felon. Now pardoned by Trump, because actual law couldn't legally find a way to absolve him. As a populist candidate he felt he had leeway to ignore federal orders. NOT above the law.
Trumped up conviction because Obama did not like that last he enforced immigration law.
keeps her name in the news.
HILLARY’S SOUTHERN ACCENT MAKES CAMEO IN SELMA: ‘WHEN THAT SPIRIT IS BREATHED INTO THEM!’
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/432393-hillary-clinton-in-selma-we-are-living-through-a-full-fledged
thinks. In her mind she's been the
first woman president since 2000.
Every move she made has been in
that direction.
Obama stole it from her, then made
it good by paving the way to 2016.
A whole network behind the scenes
was created to make sure she won.
It was a done deal.
She's forgotten none of that and she
still is the first woman president in
her mind. You'll see.
Quote: RonCThe parties aren't the same, but their individual needs match up to keep a lot of them from really wanting good, solid immigration reform.
The 2013 Gang of Eight bipartisan immigration reform that would've garnered Obama's signature was killed by one group of one party, House Republicans. The "party of no" in full force. In an era of hyper-partisanship, we had an opportunity for real reform and they said no. Of course they said no. Because that's about all they're good for, saying no to progress.
They rock.
But man, if there's one thing we can totally agree on, the parties are not the same. Not even close.
Quote: SteverinosThe 2013 Gang of Eight bipartisan immigration reform that would've garnered Obama's signature was killed by one group of one party, House Republicans. The "party of no" in full force. In an era of hyper-partisanship, we had an opportunity for real reform and they said no. Of course they said no. Because that's about all they're good for, saying no to progress.
They rock.
But man, if there's one thing we can totally agree on, the parties are not the same. Not even close.
Amnesty isn't progress.
Amnesty isn't progress.Quote: AZDuffman
Not only that, it's 10 steps backwards.
Just say no to amnesty..
Quote: AZDuffmanAmnesty isn't progress.
St. Ronnie didn't think so.
Of course, that was back when Republicans didn't suck.
Quote: SteverinosSt. Ronnie didn't think so.
Of course, that was back when Republicans didn't suck.
I did not support it then and do not now. Even Reagan can make a mistake or two. But something tells me you in general think Reagan is the devil.
The GOP has moved left since then, you should be happy.
Quote: rsactuaryJust to prove EB wrong....
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/hillary-clinton-rules-out-2020-run-but-says-im-not-going-anywhere/ar-BBUnske
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/27906-will-trump-be-impeached/53/#post704099
Yeah, we've never seen that scenario,
claim you're not running and then
jumping in at the last minute.
Quote: rsactuaryJust to prove EB wrong....
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/hillary-clinton-rules-out-2020-run-but-says-im-not-going-anywhere/ar-BBUnske
lol
EB gets it wrong all the time
Remember his Ebola mania
Talk about freaking out over nothing
Quote: terapinedlol
EB gets it wrong all the time
Remember his Ebola mania
Talk about freaking out over nothing
Yup.
Come June when Hillary isn’t running, he will just stop bringing it up and ignore us when we tell him how he’s (still) wrong about it.
Quote: ams288Yup.
Come June when Hillary isn’t running,
You'll see, 3 more months and she'll
make an announcement that She has
no choice, America needs Her. Saying
you're not running when you are is
older than the hills.
Quote: EvenBobYou'll see, 3 more months and she'll
make an announcement that She has
no choice, America needs Her. Saying
you're not running when you are is
older than the hills.
And if come July, she hasn’t announced she’s running, will you admit you were wrong?
Quote: ams288And if come July, she hasn’t announced she’s running, will you admit you were wrong?
Wrong? I'm not familiar with that sensation..
Quote: EvenBobWrong? I'm not familiar with that sensation..
Well, you should be. Remember you also said Avenatti would be the 2020 nominee... LOL
Quote: ams288Well, you should be. Remember you also said Avenatti would be the 2020 nominee... LOL
I said that before the Kavanaugh
debacle. That kinda changed things.
Quote: EvenBobI said that before the Kavanaugh
debacle. That kinda changed things.
So you admit you said it. And you were wrong about it.
Progress!
Quote: ams288So you admit you said it. And you were wrong about it.
But I wasn't wrong. At the time I made
the statement he was a viable candidate.
If he had died you would say I was wrong,
that's how desperate you are.
Quote: EvenBob
Yeah, we've never seen that scenario,
claim you're not running and then
jumping in at the last minute.
Hillary Clinton wasn’t trying to ‘close the door’ on 2020 when she said she was not running: report
Quote: EvenBobBut I wasn't wrong.
So Avenatti will be the 2020 nominee then?!
You heard it here first, folks!
Quote: ams288So Avenatti will be the 2020 nominee then?!
You heard it here first, folks!
Wow, so EB is predicting Avenatti 2020
As usual, EB gets it wrong again
Its really weird, EB gets a lot wrong, a lot, yet he can never admit it
Pretty weird. I thought Trump would lose. I was wrong. Its no biggie to me. I'm human
EB gets it wrong and he either moves the goalposts or disappears. Its a real biggie to EB
Quote: AZDuffmanHillary Clinton wasn’t trying to ‘close the door’ on 2020 when she said she was not running: report
"The unnamed source said Clinton was not trying to "be emphatic and close the door on running" with the comment and was apparently "surprised" at the reaction."
So I was correct, She wasn't saying She
wasn't running for sure and She was
surprised the media thought that.
She's running, bet on it.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AZDuffmanHillary Clinton wasn’t trying to ‘close the door’ on 2020 when she said she was not running: report
"The unnamed source said Clinton was not trying to "be emphatic and close the door on running" with the comment and was apparently "surprised" at the reaction."
So I was correct, She wasn't saying She
wasn't running for sure and She was
surprised the media thought that.
She's running, bet on it.
I will not take the other side of your requested action.
Quote:Just 40 percent of Florida voters said they believed the president should be reelected, while 53 percent were opposed to a second term, according to a new Bendixen & Amandi International poll.
Trump’s approval ratings were also poor, with 43 percent having a favorable impression of Trump, and 52 percent viewing him unfavorably — and 46 percent very unfavorably. Trump’s approval ratings look even worse when compared with the man he helped make Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, who has a 50 percent approval rating while only 23 percent disapprove.
“Trump is in trouble,” pollster Fernand Amandi said, noting that 23 percent of all Florida Republicans said he doesn’t deserve reelection. “When that many people from your own party don’t support you, it means you have to spend more time consolidating your base.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-in-trouble-in-florida-poll/ar-BBUr5SP?ocid=spartanntp
Quote: rxwineTrump will need Florida.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-in-trouble-in-florida-poll/ar-BBUr5SP?ocid=spartanntp
PMSNBC polling.
Quote: AZDuffmanPMSNBC polling.
You mean you don't believe Florida's Republican governor is at 50% approval rating?
Polls now mean very little in the long run as far as the President's side of the ballot.
Polls on the Democrat side mean a little more because they are actually in the longer process of finding a nominee. They still don't matter much at this point; there is a lot of vetting to be done yet.
A lot of things do matter--how the economy goes (you can't say you did a great job fixing the economy and then have it go to crap and hope to use that to help win an election, for example), how the Democrats handle their strategically planned election-cycle long on everything Trump and whether or not the public begins to fee they overstepped or if they feel it is a good thing (the latter is how it may be now; who knows what will happen over the coming months), the Mueller report, RBG's health (yeah, that's important and could help swing an election), and a myriad of other things.
Depending on the polling methods used, polls can lead to the wrong answer.
Quote: rxwineYou mean you don't believe Florida's Republican governor is at 50% approval rating?
I mean the lamestream media has so much used polling to create news and has been so slanted that I believe basically nothing of what they report.
Quote: EvenBobShe's running, bet on it.
She's not running, How much?
Quote: terapinedShe's not running, How much?
"The biggest movement we’ve seen on the odds sheet (other than Beto O’Rourke surging) is Hillary Clinton’s steady advance. On November 7th, her average odds were around +7200. On December 4th, she was at +6000 in average odds, and +3000 on Bovada."
https://wizardofvegas.com/quote/704471/
What odds will you offer on her getting in the race?
I'll take $10 at +3000 on her winning (payout $310, correct)...
2020 US President Odds
Donald Trump +200
Kamala Harris +700
Bernie Sanders +800
Joe Biden +900
Beto O'Rourke +1000
Amy Klobuchar +2800
Sherrod Brown +3000
Elizabeth Warren +3300
Mike Pence +5000
Kirsten Gillibrand +5000
Cory Booker +5000
Rahm Emanuel +5000
Meg Whitman +5000
Orrin Hatch +5000
Mitch McConnell +6000
Michael Avanetti +6000
Nikki Haley +6600
Vincent Viola +6600
Tulsi Gabbard +6600
Michelle Obama +10000
Gregg Popovich +10000
https://www.oddschecker.com/us/insight/specials/politics/20190306-2020-election-odds-who-will-be-the-next-us-president
Quote: RonC
What odds will you offer on her getting in the race?
Even odds to EB that she does not enter a primary
Quote: terapinedEven odds to EB that she does not enter a primary
Oh, so now you think she's running
and might make it to the primaries?
Bout time you came round..
Quote: EvenBobOh, so now you think she's running
and might make it to the primaries?
Bout time you came round..
And you claim you were once on a debate team...? lol
Quote: ams288And you claim you were once on a debate team...? lol
Yup
She is not running so there is no primary to enter
Some people here are so dumb, they cant get that
Not surprising
LOL
Quote: terapinedYup
She is not running so there is no primary to enter
You do realize you have to actually
be a candidate to get to the primaries, right?
You want to bet me she never
enters a primary, which is the next
step after entering the race. So you're
admitting she'll enter the race but
drop out before the primaries.
Understand what you're betting before
you make a bet.
Quote: terapinedSome people here are so dumb,
Quote: terapinedYup, reminds me of advantage roulette players lol
Lets try to put it on a lower
level that almost anybody
can understand. You want
to bet Joe never enters the
marathon. Then you want to
bet he never crosses the
finish line.
Which is it, he never enters,
or he enters and never crosses
the finish. They're two different
things.
Quote: terapinedYup
Some people here are so dumb
You really hit on something there..
Make a good sig line..
Ocasio-Cortez, $885G 'off the books,' FEC complaint alleges
Ocasio-Cortez, chief of staff illegally moved $885G in campaign contributions 'off the books,' FEC complaint alleges
"I read their explanation multiple times, and I still don't understand."
— Former FEC Associate General Counsel Adav Noti
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fact-check-did-ocasio-cortez-her-team-break-campaign-finance-n980121
He's getting a little edgy, I think his stash ran out.Quote: EvenBobLets try to put it on a lower
level that almost anybody
can understand. You want
to bet Joe never enters the
marathon. Then you want to
bet he never crosses the
finish line.
Which is it, he never enters,
or he enters and never crosses
the finish. They're two different
things.
You really hit on something there..
Make a good sig line..
Quote: EvenBobAnd so it continues, just like I predicted.
Ocasio-Cortez, $885G 'off the books,' FEC complaint alleges
Ocasio-Cortez, chief of staff illegally moved $885G in campaign contributions 'off the books,' FEC complaint alleges
"I read their explanation multiple times, and I still don't understand."
— Former FEC Associate General Counsel Adav Noti
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fact-check-did-ocasio-cortez-her-team-break-campaign-finance-n980121
LOL $885G is the strangest way to say $18,885 I’ve ever seen. Misleading much??
Directly from your article “While the structure of her campaign and its vendors might be confusing, it's not illegal, campaign finance experts said.”
You literally just went on for 6 pages about how Trump doing clever but legal things with money is part of the reason you like him, why he’s such a great businessman.
It just shows how terrified conservatives are of a young firecracker liberal.
Quote: gamerfreakIt just shows how terrified conservatives are of a young firecracker liberal.
They LOVE to accuse anyone who criticizes Donald of "TDS," and yet their AOC-DS is waaaaaay more severe.
On DT, some of them have convinced themselves that she's about to be thrown out of congress based on fake FEC violations and unsubstantiated ethics complaints. It's quite entertaining to watch...
Quote: gamerfreakIt just shows how terrified conservatives are of a young firecracker liberal.
I am waiting to see the investigation play out; all kinds of accusations are made and not all of them end up being substantiated. This could be something; it could be nothing...or something very minor. I have listened to talking heads on both sides--some want her jailed today and others pronounce that there is nothing there at all. I don't think there is a totally impartial news source any more.
I do "fear" her policies coming to fruition should the Democrats take control of the Senate and win the Presidency with a candidate that leans way left. I don't think that will happen, but it is possible. I "fear" the very far right, too. I think that we are a center-right country and that has served us fairly well. There are always things that could be done better but I don't think that we can do as many things for "free" as some think we can...because every dollar has to come from some where. We already know that Mexico is not going to pay for it!
Quote: RonCI am waiting to see the investigation play out; all kinds of accusations are made and not all of them end up being substantiated. This could be something; it could be nothing...or something very minor. I have listened to talking heads on both sides--some want her jailed today and others pronounce that there is nothing there at all. I don't think there is a totally impartial news source any more.
Probably will end up getting some kind of rebuke and maybe a fine. Unless she put her boyfriend on the payroll as a true no-show. That she gave him an official email is very suspect and pretty stupid, just tell him to get a gmail account. For crying out loud, what is it with these liberal women who cannot keep more than one email?
Quote: billryanI was disappointed Sen. Brown decided not to run. I think he would have been my guy.
He was the first person I ever voted for. 2006 was the first election I was eligible to vote in, and I was happy to help send him to the Senate.
However, if the Dems want any chance of taking back the Senate in the next few years, they need to hold that seat. He's got it until at least 2024. Had he ran for President, Mike DeWine, the GOP governor of Ohio, would have appointed a Republican to it.
Fun fact: Mike DeWine held Sen. Brown's Senate seat until Brown defeated him in 2006. So I'm sure he would have LOVED to appoint a Republican to it.
Quote: billryanOne day after 23 Republicans voted no on a resolution condemning anti-semitism,their noble leader accuses the Democrats of being the party of anti-Semitism. Nuff said.
The was a resolution condemning a whole bunch of things, including anti-semitism, not simply on condeming anti-semitism alone or the person who made the statement. The "Nay" votes were a response to turning what seemed to be a simple condemnation of a statement into something watered-down.
I actually listened to the debate on the motion. No one expressed anything but condemnation of anti-semitism. The Democrat Leadership failed to bring a "clean" resolution to the floor and were rightfully given a hard time about it.
I think a "clean" resolution, condemning only the action of Omar, would likely have passed without a "Nay" vote.
