This is worrisome

[Abbey Marie]

I heard Glenn Beck say that he will not vote for Jeb Bush, Trump, or Christie. He has a large following, and I am sure he is not alone. And this is a guy who really loathes liberal policies, is strongly pro life, etc. So, having a Lib in the WH another 4-8 years would appear to be a very bad thing to him. Yet, he has eliminated support for three potential (to varying degrees) Republican nominees.

Even if Hillary is indicted, I doubt you will hear many a lib radio/TV personality say they will not vote for her. They will wait and see who their nominee is, and throw their support to that person. We Conservatives never learn.

Sounds more and more to me like we will be seeing Hillary in the Oval Office.


http://thecriticalcleric.typepad.com/.a/6a01053621edd6970b0192ac02bbad970d-pi

[fj1200]

I heard Glenn Beck say that he will not vote for Jeb Bush, Trump, or Christie. ...

Sounds more and more to me like we will be seeing Hillary in the Oval Office.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't have to worry about 2/3 of that list and I think the third will run its course. Nevertheless hrc is eminently defeatable.

[Abbey Marie]

I'm pretty sure he doesn't have to worry about 2/3 of that list and I think the third will run its course. Nevertheless hrc is eminently defeatable.


Possibly, but it's too soon to be certain.

Defeatable by whom, in your opinion?

[Gunny]

I heard Glenn Beck say that he will not vote for Jeb Bush, Trump, or Christie. He has a large following, and I am sure he is not alone. And this is a guy who really loathes liberal policies, is strongly pro life, etc. So, having a Lib in the WH another 4-8 years would appear to be a very bad thing to him. Yet, he has eliminated support for three potential (to varying degrees) Republican nominees.

Even if Hillary is indicted, I doubt you will hear many a lib radio/TV personality say they will not vote for her. They will wait and see who their nominee is, and throw their support to that person. We Conservatives never learn.

Sounds more and more to me like we will be seeing Hillary in the Oval Office.


http://thecriticalcleric.typepad.com/.a/6a01053621edd6970b0192ac02bbad970d-pi

Well, here we go again Abs. "I won't vote for (fill in the blank)". You'd think somebody would notice we've had 7 years of Capt Spineless as a result. The right is as guilty as the left in this. "I'm standing on my principles". You sure as Hell don't have any "principles" without representation.

[fj1200]

Possibly, but it's too soon to be certain.

Defeatable by whom, in your opinion?

She has sky high negatives and ready made commercials that will show her incompetence, arrogance, and corruption. Defeatable by almost anyone who can lucidly explain why conservative values and positions are the best way forward. Cruz, Rubio, Bush, even Kasich are probably best able to do so.

[Gunny]

She has sky high negatives and ready made commercials that will show her incompetence, arrogance, and corruption. Defeatable by almost anyone who can lucidly explain why conservative values and positions are the best way forward. Cruz, Rubio, Bush, even Kasich are probably best able to do so.

If we ALL get behind one and stick to it.

[Abbey Marie]

She has sky high negatives and ready made commercials that will show her incompetence, arrogance, and corruption. Defeatable by almost anyone who can lucidly explain why conservative values and positions are the best way forward. Cruz, Rubio, Bush, even Kasich are probably best able to do so.


As I said to NT about Hillary, I really hope you are right. But my heart and head tell me it's not going to end well for us.

[revelarts]

I heard Glenn Beck say that he will not vote for Jeb Bush, Trump, or Christie. ...

HUH wha? those are the same 3 i see the most problems with.
At least i've got some company, probably for the same reasons, for starters non of them are serious conservatives, the only thing they align with the current "anger" based conservative on is more aggressive war... talk... on terror. And bending/interpreting the constitution anyway you want to "keep us safe".
After that nearly everything else is for sale, or they've been on both sides of.

[Abbey Marie]

HUH wha? those are the same 3 i see the most problems with.
At least i've got some company, probably for the same reasons, for starters non of them are serious conservatives, the only thing they align with the current "anger" based conservative on is more aggressive war... talk... on terror. And bending/interpreting the constitution anyway you want to "keep us safe".
After that nearly everything else is for sale, or they've been on both sides of.




http://aaronmilesfastball.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/le-sigh.jpg?w=584

[Gunny]

HUH wha? those are the same 3 i see the most problems with.
At least i've got some company, probably for the same reasons, for starters non of them are serious conservatives, the only thing they align with the current "anger" based conservative on is more aggressive war... talk... on terror. And bending/interpreting the constitution anyway you want to "keep us safe".
After that nearly everything else is for sale, or they've been on both sides of.


http://aaronmilesfastball.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/le-sigh.jpg?w=584

No offense to anyone I've apparently continually offended, but I have to agree with him. At least just this once.

[PixieStix]

If we ALL get behind one and stick to it.

Yes exactly. Which is why we should support the front runner and stop replying to conspiracy theories threads :thumb:

[jimnyc]

Yes exactly. Which is why we should support the front runner and stop replying to conspiracy theories threads :thumb:

We have a front runner now, but too many are trying to chop him down instead of getting behind him, and then they'll say "I told you so" if he loses.

[Abbey Marie]

So, Rev, just to clarify, if the Republican nominee isn't a "serious" enough Conservative (in your opinion), it's all the same to you that Hillary gets elected? There are no degrees of likability for you- just a black and white determination that someone isn't seriously Conservative enough?

[PixieStix]

Can you all imagine how bad we could beat Hillary by supporting the front runner. :poke:

[revelarts]

Yes exactly. Which is why we should support the front runner and stop replying to conspiracy theories threads :thumb:
We have a front runner now, but too many are trying to chop him down instead of getting behind him, and then they'll say "I told you so" if he loses.


There we're plenty of Conservatives/Republicans that stayed home with the Romney ticket even against Obama. And Romney had less negative baggage than Trump. (even though he had leftist acts and words in his background as well) . So folks shouldn't feel like Trump is getting some higher level of scrutiny or kneecapping. He's getting what he deserves based on his life, slip shod unconstitutional promises and offensive words.

[Abbey Marie]

There we're plenty of Conservatives/Republicans that stayed home with the Romney ticket even against Obama. And Romney had less negative baggage than Trump. (even though he had leftist acts and words in his background as well) . So folks shouldn't feel like Trump is getting some higher level of scrutiny or kneecapping. He's getting what he deserves based on his life, slip shod unconstitutional promises and offensive words.

Romney may have had fewer negatives, but he also had fewer motivating positives, in many folks' eyes. Put another way, he wasn't inspiring much passion.

[Kathianne]

There we're plenty of Conservatives/Republicans that stayed home with the Romney ticket even against Obama. And Romney had less negative baggage than Trump. (even though he had leftist acts and words in his background as well) . So folks shouldn't feel like Trump is getting some higher level of scrutiny or kneecapping. He's getting what he deserves based on his life, slip shod unconstitutional promises and offensive words.

You know Rev? I've never acknowledge just how tough and forgiving you have been regarding attacks on Ron Paul and those who made them. Seriously, don't think what's gone down with Trump has been nearly as much on personal against him, then again he doesn't have the written trail-I'd likely have found something if he did. ;)

[jimnyc]

There we're plenty of Conservatives/Republicans that stayed home with the Romney ticket even against Obama. And Romney had less negative baggage than Trump. (even though he had leftist acts and words in his background as well) . So folks shouldn't feel like Trump is getting some higher level of scrutiny or kneecapping. He's getting what he deserves based on his life, slip shod unconstitutional promises and offensive words.

I don't believe anyone said otherwise, or at least I haven't. My only complaints about any scrutiny has been that of his supporters, not Trump himself.

[revelarts]

So, Rev, just to clarify, if the Republican nominee isn't a "serious" enough Conservative (in your opinion), it's all the same to you that Hillary gets elected? There are no degrees of likability for you- just a black and white determination that someone isn't seriously Conservative enough?

Hilary is bad on nearly every issue i know of.
But a candidate that is good on only ONE issue is not a choice I think i should feel compelled to RAH RAH as if it's going to make a big difference. I'm definitely not going to go around pretending that it's a GREAT candidate, or be upset with others who point out the obvious flaws in the candidates positions.

not sure why conservatives feel like they have to settled for "lowered expectations" level candidates just to beat the Democrats even lower level crap.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjQvVBZgI_k

[jimnyc]

not sure why conservatives feel like they have to settled for "lowered expectations" level candidates just to beat the Democrats even lower level crap.

No one ever said that either. I think what some are saying, that eventually it WILL come down to "someone" against Hillary. And whether you have high, or low expectations, at that point one can make a choice to vote, or help beat the Democrats. While I understand if he has very very little that appeals to you, wouldn't that little bit be better than nothing from Hillary? Or would it not matter to you if it were Trump opposing her?

[revelarts]

I don't believe anyone said otherwise, or at least I haven't. My only complaints about any scrutiny has been that of his supporters, not Trump himself.

well i hope i haven't been hassling supporters, i'm just disappointed that there seem to be so many.

[jimnyc]

well i hope i haven't been hassling supporters, i'm just disappointed that there seem to be so many.

I don't believe you have. While you have voiced your displeasure for Trump, I didn't see you go after supporters as others did, no.

[PixieStix]

well i hope i haven't been hassling supporters, i'm just disappointed that there seem to be so many.

Sorry to disappoint :coffee:

[revelarts]

No one ever said that either. I think what some are saying, that eventually it WILL come down to "someone" against Hillary. And whether you have high, or low expectations, at that point one can make a choice to vote, or help beat the Democrats. While I understand if he has very very little that appeals to you, wouldn't that little bit be better than nothing from Hillary? Or would it not matter to you if it were Trump opposing her?


I can only think of one policy that Trump has promoted that i agree with and he's been on both sides of that DURING the campaign, so to me it's not a whole lot of difference.

to make it extreme it's like Mussolini vs Stalin.
OK yes one may be a bit better than the other but I'm not pretending either is a real choice to move forward.
Or someone i NEED to get behind so the sky doesn't fall.

[jimnyc]

Sorry to disappoint :coffee:

:lol:

[Gunny]

I don't believe you have. While you have voiced your displeasure for Trump, I didn't see you go after supporters as others did, no.

How long have you known me? 13-14 years? And on how many boards? If I go after someone, there's no mistake. Nobody has to even guess. You should know that as well as anyone else since you banned for it once. I don't understand why you're so offended over what was supposed to be a joke.

[Abbey Marie]

I don't believe you have. While you have voiced your displeasure for Trump, I didn't see you go after supporters as others did, no.

That's not Rev's style. A very big reason why we love him. :2up:

[Abbey Marie]

I can only think of one policy that Trump has promoted that i agree with and he's been on both sides of that DURING the campaign, so to me it's not a whole lot of difference.

to make it extreme it's like Mussolini vs Stalin.
OK yes one may be a bit better than the other but I'm not pretending either is a real choice to move forward.
Or someone i NEED to get behind so the sky doesn't fall.


Ok, then how about this: It may be Mussolini vs. Stalin, but it's both of them vs. Ms. Satan

:eek:

[jimnyc]

I can only think of one policy that Trump has promoted that i agree with and he's been on both sides of that DURING the campaign, so to me it's not a whole lot of difference.

to make it extreme it's like Mussolini vs Stalin.
OK yes one may be a bit better than the other but I'm not pretending either is a real choice to move forward.
Or someone i NEED to get behind so the sky doesn't fall.

What part of his VA reforms do you disagree with? About his 2nd amendment rights? And that of his tax plan? I know you don't agree with his immigration stuff - but do you at least agree with the stuff UP until tossing folks out? I mean basically everything minus tossing out 11 million folks, the rest of his plan? What about his healthcare plans? And no need for great lengths, but in these few areas off the top of my head, you think its the same as Hillary, or worse?

[Perianne]

I can only think of one policy that Trump has promoted that i agree with and he's been on both sides of that DURING the campaign, so to me it's not a whole lot of difference.

to make it extreme it's like Mussolini vs Stalin.
OK yes one may be a bit better than the other but I'm not pretending either is a real choice to move forward.
Or someone i NEED to get behind so the sky doesn't fall.

Follow the conservative Perianne. I will not lead you astray.

[revelarts]

Ok, then how about this: It may be Mussolini vs. Stalin, but it's both of them vs. v Satan :eek:

LOL sheesh Lousies, Look I think Hillary is probably the most corrupt candidate out there.
I wish there were other Dems so at least they'd have an honorable socialist candidate. But satan is a bit strong. lol!


What part of his VA reforms do you disagree with? About his 2nd amendment rights? And that of his tax plan? I know you don't agree with his immigration stuff - but do you at least agree with the stuff UP until tossing folks out? I mean basically everything minus tossing out 11 million folks, the rest of his plan? What about his healthcare plans? And no need for great lengths, but in these few areas off the top of my head, you think its the same as Hillary, or worse?

the VA reforms sound pretty good but Congress and any president can and should do most of that that NOW.
many candidate have promised similar and haven't done jack. the "trust me" --I'm the Donald I'm really concerned about this issue- doesn't impress me , sorry i'm cynical.

2nd amendment yes, you're right i forgot about that one. he gets real points for that.
I don't like his tax plan.
Immigration, I think a small part makes real good sense, not all, but joined at the hip with the rest of his package no way.
His Health Care plan i'm not familiar with.

When i compare hillary to Trump it's not like they are proposing the same bad things but different bad things.
death by snake pit or a mauled by a playful well meaning bear.

[PixieStix]

LOL sheesh louse Look I think Hillary is probably the most corrupt candidate out there. I wish there were other Dems so at least they'd have an honorable socialist candidate. But satan is a bit strong. lol!



the VA reforms sound pretty good but Congress and any president can and should do most of that that NOW.
many candidate have promised similar and haven't done jack. the "trust me" --I'm the Donald I'm really concerned about this issue- doesn't impress me , sorry i'm cynical.

2nd amendment yes, you're right i forgot about that one. he gets real points for that.
I don't like his tax plan.
Immigration, I think a small part makes real good sense, not all, but joined at the hip with the rest of his package no way.
His Health Care plan i'm not familiar with.



When i compare hillary to Trump it's not like they are proposing the same bad things but different bad things.
death by snake pit or a mauled by a playful well meaning bear.

Thank you for reading his actual proposals. :cheers2:However Hillary is a proven liar and a corrupt politician with no morals. She belongs in prison and Trump doesn't. I do not see how you can compare the 2. After reading his proposals :slap:

[glockmail]

I heard Glenn Beck say that he will not vote for Jeb Bush, Trump, or Christie. He has a large following, and I am sure he is not alone. And this is a guy who really loathes liberal policies, is strongly pro life, etc. So, having a Lib in the WH another 4-8 years would appear to be a very bad thing to him. Yet, he has eliminated support for three potential (to varying degrees) Republican nominees.

Even if Hillary is indicted, I doubt you will hear many a lib radio/TV personality say they will not vote for her. They will wait and see who their nominee is, and throw their support to that person. We Conservatives never learn.

Sounds more and more to me like we will be seeing Hillary in the Oval Office.


Hillary's not going to get indicted while The Obama is still in office. If she loses the election, most of the GOP candidates will secretly exchange her political aspirations for making the indictment go away. The lone exception is Ted Cruz. If she wins the election, then there's no chance in hell she'll get indicted.

I can see Beck's point, not supporting a true conservative, letting Hillary win instead. America didn't wake up after The Obama's first term, and if it doesn't wake up after his last, then it will take a third or fourth term of rampant liberalism for America to do so. Better that than a GOP "moderate" dirtying the GOP brand even further.

[Perianne]

Hillary's not going to get indicted while The Obama is still in office. If she loses the election, most of the GOP candidates will secretly exchange her political aspirations for making the indictment go away. The lone exception is Ted Cruz. If she wins the election, then there's no chance in hell she'll get indicted.

I can see Beck's point, not supporting a true conservative, letting Hillary win instead. America didn't wake up after The Obama's first term, and if it doesn't wake up after his last, then it will take a third or fourth term of rampant liberalism for America to do so. Better that than a GOP "moderate" dirtying the GOP brand even further.

Even if a Republican wins the election, he/she will not go after Hillary. She will skate and she knows it.

For some reason I think the only person who would go after Hillary....would be Carly Fiorina. I admit I have no basis for that thought.

[PixieStix]

Even if a Republican wins the election, he/she will not go after Hillary. She will skate and she knows it.

For some reason I think the only person who would go after Hillary....would be Carly Fiorina. I admit I have no basis for that thought.

I think Trump WILL go after her. But you are right Carly would tear her a new one. ;) Excuse the expression. It is all I could think of. Carly is a tough cookie that is all but being ignored and the left has been really really nasty to her.

[revelarts]

No one will go after Hillary just like W didn't go after after Bill and Obama didn't go after W..
they all look out for each other and have dirt on each other, against the public interest and the law in the end.

[Black Diamond]

Well, here we go again Abs. "I won't vote for (fill in the blank)". You'd think somebody would notice we've had 7 years of Capt Spineless as a result. The right is as guilty as the left in this. "I'm standing on my principles". You sure as Hell don't have any "principles" without representation.

Pragmatism vs idealism

[PixieStix]

No one will go after Hillary just like W didn't go after after Bill and Obama didn't go after W..
they all look out for each other and have dirt on each other.

This is why we need a non establishment nominee

[aboutime]

For now. Since we have almost a full year before going to the polls. I have decided to use the George Carlin principle, and not get involved in all the arguments about WHO to vote for in the election.

So. Though I know everyone will always say "If you don't vote, you can't complain!" I beg to differ, just as Carlin once said. "If I vote...no matter who I vote for. Someone will blame me for voting for someone. So. I am not going to VOTE. Then I have every right to Complain about everyone else who voted, and got another OBAMA.":poke:

Think about it. And I will expect to be told exactly what I predicted everyone would say.

[revelarts]

Pragmatism vs idealism
Ok say you've barley made it through the desert.
But now in front of you there are jugs of Salt Water or jugs of Water with some cyanide .

which is pragmatic choice?

[glockmail]

No one will go after Hillary just like W didn't go after after Bill and Obama didn't go after W..
they all look out for each other and have dirt on each other against the public interest and the law in the end.
That's exactly right except for Cruz as I said earlier- no one has dirt on him. And as others have said Fiorina will go after her as well, again because she doesn't have any dirt and because I think she resents the fact that Hillary has had everything handed to her because of being married to Bill, using her femininity as an advantage, while she has had to work her ass off to climb the ladder, with her femininity being a disadvantage.

[revelarts]

This is why we need a non establishment nominee

I agree no Rs or Ds.

[Perianne]

That's exactly right except for Cruz as I said earlier- no one has dirt on him. And as others have said Fiorina will go after her as well, again because she doesn't have any dirt and because I think she resents the fact that Hillary has had everything handed to her because of being married to Bill, using her femininity as an advantage, while she has had to work her ass off to climb the ladder, with her femininity being a disadvantage.

There is truly nothing about Hillary that is feminine. She is disgusting.

[Abbey Marie]

LOL sheesh Lousies, Look I think Hillary is probably the most corrupt candidate out there.
I wish there were other Dems so at least they'd have an honorable socialist candidate. But satan is a bit strong. lol!
...


Ok, I'm reasonable- I'll tone it down.

How about Them vs. the Anti-Christ?

:coffee:

[PixieStix]

There is truly nothing about Hillary that is feminine. She is disgusting.

No there isn't. But I think he means using feminaziism to get elected ;)

[PixieStix]

I agree no Rs or Ds.

No D's for sure :salute:

[Elessar]

No one will go after Hillary just like W didn't go after after Bill and Obama didn't go after W..
they all look out for each other and have dirt on each other, against the public interest and the law in the end.

Now that is not at all accurate. Whether subtly, or directly, he certainly did.
He's the only one in my lifetime I have ever seen pull that on a predecessor.

W had class. He did not blame Clinton for the 911 lack of Intel sharing.
He was smart enough to see there was a huge hole in it and fixed it,
even though Bill was offered Osama's head on a silver platter and turned it down.

[Black Diamond]

Now that is not at all accurate. Whether subtly, or directly, he certainly did.
He's the only one in my lifetime I have ever seen pull that on a predecessor.

W had class. He did not blame Clinton for the 911 lack of Intel sharing.
He was smart enough to see there was a huge hole in it and fixed it,
even though Bill was offered Osama's head on a silver platter and turned it down.

Obama has gone after Bush for seven years

[Elessar]

For now. Since we have almost a full year before going to the polls. I have decided to use the George Carlin principle, and not get involved in all the arguments about WHO to vote for in the election.

So. Though I know everyone will always say "If you don't vote, you can't complain!" I beg to differ, just as Carlin once said. "If I vote...no matter who I vote for. Someone will blame me for voting for someone. So. I am not going to VOTE. Then I have every right to Complain about everyone else who voted, and got another OBAMA.":poke:

Think about it. And I will expect to be told exactly what I predicted everyone would say.

The worst decision, AT, is to not vote at all. I'd say simply vote
against the worst of the lot.

[Kathianne]

No one will go after Hillary just like W didn't go after after Bill and Obama didn't go after W..
they all look out for each other and have dirt on each other, against the public interest and the law in the end.

Problem is that Clinton was already impeached and the vote fell short of removal, but he wasn't found innocent, no indeedy.

Obama has smeared Bush and his administration for 8 years, he didn't act unlawfully. YOU may argue he didn't adhere to the Constitution, but his actions were legal. Just like I've repeatedly told others, Obama's actions until very recently didn't rise imo, to the levels needed for impeachment, that may have changed and be changing.

[glockmail]

There is truly nothing about Hillary that is feminine. She is disgusting.
I agree, that was not the best choice of words. But she would be an unknown had she not been a woman, married to Bill.

[Black Diamond]

Problem is that Clinton was already impeached and the vote fell short of removal, but he wasn't found innocent, no indeedy.

Obama has smeared Bush and his administration for 8 years, he didn't act unlawfully. YOU may argue he didn't adhere to the Constitution, but his actions were legal. Just like I've repeatedly told others, Obama's actions until very recently didn't rise imo, to the levels needed for impeachment, that may have changed and be changing.
Impeaching Obama would be a waste of time no matter what he does.

[aboutime]

Problem is that Clinton was already impeached and the vote fell short of removal, but he wasn't found innocent, no indeedy.

Obama has smeared Bush and his administration for 8 years, he didn't act unlawfully. YOU may argue he didn't adhere to the Constitution, but his actions were legal. Just like I've repeatedly told others, Obama's actions until very recently didn't rise imo, to the levels needed for impeachment, that may have changed and be changing.



Not to mention that the U.S. Supreme Court has also declared that Politicians (including presidents) who LIE intentionally, or accidentally CAN....Per the First Amendment.

Difference is. Obama has made Lying his professional, successful Goal in life, with the intent to Destroy America.

[Elessar]

Obama has gone after Bush for seven years

Aye, My friend...quite accurate