Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - Printable Version
+- InsaneTrain Forums (https://insanetrain.com)
+-- Forum: General (https://insanetrain.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: General Forum (https://insanetrain.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? (/showthread.php?tid=29644)
+- InsaneTrain Forums (https://insanetrain.com)
+-- Forum: General (https://insanetrain.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: General Forum (https://insanetrain.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? (/showthread.php?tid=29644)
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - BIRD33 - 10-12-2005
SanDog Wrote:You certainly like to read into what I write. I am saying that Al Gore's antics at the end of the last losing effort are easily brought forth. The Dem party needs fresh blood. They need to get a real direction. Going back to the well is not a good strategy for them. They are a joke.
I concur about McCain, I voted for him once before and I will do it again. I like that guy a lot.
I didnt read into what you wrote, just asked a questions which I still dont see an answer to.I personally dont think Gore would be that bad.His antics werent unjustified,He had the popular vote and his opponents brother was Gov of the state that had problems counting votes. He has experience and basically had more votes than Bush in the first election.I think the Dems are struggling to find a message but Its better than the win at all costs mentality that the GOP has.Spreading rumors about a black Mcain love child and other rove like shit are coming back to bite them in the ass.Alot of republicans are scared of a Mcain\H.Clinton ticket.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - SanDog - 10-12-2005
BIRD33 Wrote:I didnt read into what you wrote, just asked a questions which I still dont see an answer to.I personally dont think Gore would be that bad.His antics werent unjustified,He had the popular vote and his opponents brother was Gov of the state that had problems counting votes. He has experience and basically had more votes than Bush in the first election.I think the Dems are struggling to find a message but Its better than the win at all costs mentality that the GOP has.Spreading rumors about a black Mcain love child and other rove like shit are coming back to bite them in the ass.Alot of republicans are scared of a Mcain\H.Clinton ticket.
McCain would kill her. No I do not believe that Gore would have been a good president. But with the way things are now I think anyone could be doing a better job than GW.
I am a HUGE McCain fan.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - BIRD33 - 10-12-2005
SanDog Wrote:McCain would kill her. No I do not believe that Gore would have been a good president. But with the way things are now I think anyone could be doing a better job than GW.
I am a HUGE McCain fan.
Im not talking about a Mcain Vs Hillary matchup,im talking about a Mcain\Hillary ticket with clinton as the vice.It has been talked about because of the poor relationship Mcain has with Bush and most of the GOP, its a republicans worst nightmare.It probably wont happen, Mcain was quiet during most of bush's presidency so Im sure it was promised that this will be his time.Even though I think guliani is overated a Mcain\Guiliani ticket would be virtually unstoppable.I would vote for it.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - SanDog - 10-12-2005
BIRD33 Wrote:Im not talking about a Mcain Vs Hillary matchup,im talking about a Mcain\Hillary ticket with clinton as the vice.It has been talked about because of the poor relationship Mcain has with Bush and most of the GOP, its a republicans worst nightmare.It probably wont happen, Mcain was quiet during most of bush's presidency so Im sure it was promised that this will be his time.Even though I think guliani is overated a Mcain\Guiliani ticket would be virtually unstoppable.I would vote for it.I don't see him jumping ship. I think the M/G ticket would be unstoppable as well. The VP doesn't much matter to me, but his name would win them NY.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - BIRD33 - 10-12-2005
By MATTIAS KAREN
The Associated Press
Wednesday, October 12, 2005; 4:24 PM
STOCKHOLM, Sweden -- Former Vice President Al Gore said Wednesday he had no intention of ever running for president again, but he said the United States would be "a different country" if he had won the 2000 election, launching into a scathing attack of the Bush administration.
"I have absolutely no plans and no expectations of ever being a candidate again," Gore told reporters after giving a speech at an economic forum in Sweden.
When asked how the United States would have been different if he had become president, though, he had harsh criticism for Bush's policies.
"We would not have invaded a country that didn't attack us," he said, referring to Iraq. "We would not have taken money from the working families and given it to the most wealthy families."
"We would not be trying to control and intimidate the news media. We would not be routinely torturing people," Gore said. "We would be a different country."
I think he's right.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - SanDog - 10-12-2005
BIRD33 Wrote:By MATTIAS KAREN
The Associated Press
Wednesday, October 12, 2005; 4:24 PM
STOCKHOLM, Sweden -- Former Vice President Al Gore said Wednesday he had no intention of ever running for president again, but he said the United States would be "a different country" if he had won the 2000 election, launching into a scathing attack of the Bush administration.
"I have absolutely no plans and no expectations of ever being a candidate again," Gore told reporters after giving a speech at an economic forum in Sweden.
When asked how the United States would have been different if he had become president, though, he had harsh criticism for Bush's policies.
"We would not have invaded a country that didn't attack us," he said, referring to Iraq. "We would not have taken money from the working families and given it to the most wealthy families."
"We would not be trying to control and intimidate the news media. We would not be routinely torturing people," Gore said. "We would be a different country."
I think he's right.
I think it is easy to sit back and criticize for him. This bullshit about taking from working families and giving it to wealthy is complete garbage. And without actually having to make the call it easy to say you would not have gone in. You just don't know what you would do in that situation unless you have done it. Only GW can speak to that.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - BIRD33 - 10-12-2005
SanDog Wrote:I think it is easy to sit back and criticize for him. This bullshit about taking from working families and giving it to wealthy is complete garbage. And without actually having to make the call it easy to say you would not have gone in. You just don't know what you would do in that situation unless you have done it. Only GW can speak to that.
No we can all speak to it since we all had the same info.I know its easy to second guess but when bush doesnt even admit that we arent there now for the same reasons we originally went there then he does everybody a diservice by twisting the facts.Gore was against the Iraq war from the get go so his call was right then and it is now.Its not secondguessing if you came out against it the whole time.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - SanDog - 10-12-2005
BIRD33 Wrote:No we can all speak to it since we all had the same info.I know its easy to second guess but when bush doesnt even admit that we arent there now for the same reasons we originally went there then he does everybody a diservice by twisting the facts.Gore was against the Iraq war from the get go so his call was right then and it is now.Its not secondguessing if you came out against it the whole time.
I don't believe a word out of either of the their mouths (Gore and Bush). He is against everything the president was for. That has been his MO and Kerry's MO. We are going to agree to disagree on that.
I would have made the same call as the President at the time. I would also still have our troops there. Right or wrong to begin with, you have to finish now.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - BIRD33 - 10-13-2005
Sure you cant bail now but just the example it sets to other nations that you can invade a country that didnt attack you for chickenshit reasons with the ultimate goal to remodel an area in our image.I dont care about them violating sanctions,name a sanction that N korea hasnt violated.I just think its a dangerous precedent to set.We arent perfect,the world isnt perfect and nobodys god is the right one.What happens if we arent the most powerful nation on earth someday and we are in Iraqs position?
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - snarg - 10-13-2005
wtf is intelligent dialogue doing at IT??
time to pull the plug boss
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - Flumper Barflusterbutt - 10-13-2005
BIRD33 Wrote:Sure you cant bail now but just the example it sets to other nations that you can invade a country that didnt attack you for chickenshit reasons with the ultimate goal to remodel an area in our image.I dont care about them violating sanctions,name a sanction that N korea hasnt violated.I just think its a dangerous precedent to set.We arent perfect,the world isnt perfect and nobodys god is the right one.What happens if we arent the most powerful nation on earth someday and we are in Iraqs position?
We've been backing down from those 16th century fucks for long enough. Something had to be done. Just because they happened to be grazing sheep on the very spot where the wealthiest oil field on the earth sits, doesn't entitle them to fund an Anti American hatred that is permeating the muslim world.
We should have done it years ago, but we didn't. Bush did it because he knew if he didn't do it, the one last chance might pass us by. No one can predict the future, but we know there will be larger and larger needs for oil, we know people will continue to pay good money for that oil, and we know that if we didnt do something about it, that money would continue to go into the hands of a god damn criminal.
If he's not such a bad guy, then why are his countrymen arguing on who is going to get to kill him. They are saying now that he will probably be executed by the Iraqi courts before all of his hearings are complete.
There has got to be one stable, democratic country in that region besides Israel.
The fact of the matter is, that after 9-11, Bush was going to over throw Hussein no matter what evidence he could muster to support the decision. I don't think he asked anyone to concoct the reasons. I think he asked the military to come up with everything they had. I think he felt, as I did, that if somebody like Osama Bin Laden could figure out a way to disrupt our economy and kill people over here like he did, then what could someone like Hussein do with the kind of money he had and would later have.
Our vulnerability is not in the death of 2,000 people from a bomb, but the devastation to our economy. 9-11 exposed that and it scared the shit out of a lot of people.
So, fuck that rag head and the rest that continue to fight us. We are there to bring them a better life and they just better get ready to accept it. History will show this to be a good decision.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - snarg - 10-13-2005
i retract my statement about intelligent dialogue
sorry about the confusion
plug it back in boss
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - BIRD33 - 10-13-2005
Flumper Barflusterbutt Wrote:We've been backing down from those 16th century fucks for long enough. Something had to be done. Just because they happened to be grazing sheep on the very spot where the wealthiest oil field on the earth sits, doesn't entitle them to fund an Anti American hatred that is permeating the muslim world.
We should have done it years ago, but we didn't. Bush did it because he knew if he didn't do it, the one last chance might pass us by. No one can predict the future, but we know there will be larger and larger needs for oil, we know people will continue to pay good money for that oil, and we know that if we didnt do something about it, that money would continue to go into the hands of a god damn criminal.
If he's not such a bad guy, then why are his countrymen arguing on who is going to get to kill him. They are saying now that he will probably be executed by the Iraqi courts before all of his hearings are complete.
There has got to be one stable, democratic country in that region besides Israel.
The fact of the matter is, that after 9-11, Bush was going to over throw Hussein no matter what evidence he could muster to support the decision. I don't think he asked anyone to concoct the reasons. I think he asked the military to come up with everything they had. I think he felt, as I did, that if somebody like Osama Bin Laden could figure out a way to disrupt our economy and kill people over here like he did, then what could someone like Hussein do with the kind of money he had and would later have.
Our vulnerability is not in the death of 2,000 people from a bomb, but the devastation to our economy. 9-11 exposed that and it scared the shit out of a lot of people.
So, fuck that rag head and the rest that continue to fight us. We are there to bring them a better life and they just better get ready to accept it. History will show this to be a good decision.
Your first sentence is your whole argument in a nut shell.That type of thinking is what is getting American soldiers killed as we speak.We arent always right and we arent the worlds policeman,we have to many side deals with oppresive goverments that serve our needs(saudia arabia) to take the moral high ground.If America was founded on the thinking that our way is right and our president has the mandate to change peoples way of life and beliefs we wouldnt have made it past 1820.Is george bush smarter than Thomas Jefferson?
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - snarg - 10-13-2005
birdman, quit wasting your time on this rockhead
it is hopeless
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - Flumper Barflusterbutt - 10-13-2005
BIRD33 Wrote:Your first sentence is your whole argument in a nut shell.That type of thinking is what is getting American soldiers killed as we speak.We arent always right and we arent the worlds policeman,we have to many side deals with oppresive goverments that serve our needs(saudia arabia) to take the moral high ground.If America was founded on the thinking that our way is right and our president has the mandate to change peoples way of life and beliefs we wouldnt have made it past 1820.Is george bush smarter than Thomas Jefferson?Gosh, I could have sworn that Thomas Jefferson had some slaves. And that he watched a few Indians get the shit kicked out of them just because we wanted what they had. Don't try to tell me that our founding fathers were the moral high ground that built this fine country. Sure they were good men, and had unprecedented ideas in forming a government. But they weren't about taking shit. And they wouldn't have allowed our nations economy to be exposed by some nutjob lining his pocket with the wealth of the world and laying awake at night trying to figure a way to pay back the Americans.
I have a feeling that if Thomas Jefferson had been president back when Jimmy Carter was running things, Iran might be the 51st state.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - Flumper Barflusterbutt - 10-13-2005
snarg Wrote:birdman, quit wasting your time on this rockheadYeah, I didn't take Pussyology 101 in college.
it is hopeless
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - BIRD33 - 10-13-2005
Flumper Barflusterbutt Wrote:Gosh, I could have sworn that Thomas Jefferson had some slaves. And that he watched a few Indians get the shit kicked out of them just because we wanted what they had. Don't try to tell me that our founding fathers were the moral high ground that built this fine country. Sure they were good men, and had unprecedented ideas in forming a government. But they weren't about taking shit. And they wouldn't have allowed our nations economy to be exposed by some nutjob lining his pocket with the wealth of the world and laying awake at night trying to figure a way to pay back the Americans.
I have a feeling that if Thomas Jefferson had been president back when Jimmy Carter was running things, Iran might be the 51st state.
Flumper how many years do you think it will take to stabalize Iraq?Keep in mind they are on the verge of civil war.Im curious how long you think it will take.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - Tribal Dragon - 10-13-2005
I don't do political.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - quint - 10-13-2005
I think it will be McCain or Santorum. Will be interesting though.
Who will be the republican party candidate in the next election? - Don - 10-13-2005
I vote for Billary. That is all.