The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Republican Debates: Round 3
Gosling
Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered User regular
Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered User regular
MSNBC had their shot, FOX News had theirs, now it's CNN's turn at the plate. Both parties are in new Hampshire to debate again. Sunday was Round 2 for the Dems, Tuesday we'll be seeing the Republican Round 3. Both are to be moderated by Wolf Blitzer and held at Saint Anselm College in Manchester.
REPUBLICAN DEBATE:
TIME: 7 PM Eastern, Tuesday
FIELD: The same 10 as the last two times: Tommy Thompson, Rudy Guiliani, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Rudy Guiliani, Sam Brownback, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Jim Gilmore.
NOTABLE ABSENCES: Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich. You'd think Fred would have hopped in, but nope.
The next debates after this (don't know the networks):
DEMOCRATS: July 23, Charleston, SC. (Apparently a Youtube and Google-based debate.)
REPUBLICANS: October 21, Orlando, FL.
So there might be some time yet if you're in the back of the Democratic field (though not very much), but if you're in the back of the GOP field, it's do-or-die on Tuesday. July at least leaves you a little time to find a foothold, though it's still a gap of 1 1/2 months. October, though, if you're still trying to get up out of the 1% range, just do everyone a favor and pack it in. You're done. A straggler is not going to find the support on the campaign trail if he can't find it in a debate.
I'm looking for the stragglers to goad the front-runners into anything and everything they possibly can, trying to drag down their numbers in the hope of picking up someone, anyone. There might be an attempt by a front-runner to deliver the knockout punch to a straggler if things get too dangerous.
REPUBLICAN DEBATE:
TIME: 7 PM Eastern, Tuesday
FIELD: The same 10 as the last two times: Tommy Thompson, Rudy Guiliani, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Rudy Guiliani, Sam Brownback, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Jim Gilmore.
NOTABLE ABSENCES: Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich. You'd think Fred would have hopped in, but nope.
The next debates after this (don't know the networks):
DEMOCRATS: July 23, Charleston, SC. (Apparently a Youtube and Google-based debate.)
REPUBLICANS: October 21, Orlando, FL.
So there might be some time yet if you're in the back of the Democratic field (though not very much), but if you're in the back of the GOP field, it's do-or-die on Tuesday. July at least leaves you a little time to find a foothold, though it's still a gap of 1 1/2 months. October, though, if you're still trying to get up out of the 1% range, just do everyone a favor and pack it in. You're done. A straggler is not going to find the support on the campaign trail if he can't find it in a debate.
I'm looking for the stragglers to goad the front-runners into anything and everything they possibly can, trying to drag down their numbers in the hope of picking up someone, anyone. There might be an attempt by a front-runner to deliver the knockout punch to a straggler if things get too dangerous.
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
Gosling on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Puny Human #1: I would be an awesome president, 9/11.
Moderator: Puny Human #2, would YOU like to produce a 30 second sound clip?
Puny HUman #2: Someone other than me would be a terrible president, 9/11.
And on and on in that fashion.
Go Get 'Em Giuliani!
That female has an impressive backbone.
Or, at least, I assume that the one on the bottom is a female. It could be a homosexual male, in which case I appologize to it for mistaking its gender.
Ah.
I fucking love you
I don't think theres anything any of them can do now to get my vote.
So . . . basically you are a democrat?
And why are there no two-party debates? Can't they get along long enough to have such a debate?
And if Ron Paul and Mike Gravel were on the same stage they would probably combine and destroy everyone else.
Mind you, this would not be a bad thing.
Edit: Republican/Democrat debate, moderated by Jerry Springer.
"Your party wrecked my country, and I will destroy you."
The CNN democrat debate was not the sort of debate during which one would nod off.
If the Republican debate is similar it could be nice to watch, unless Rudy says "9/11" too many times.
I'm expecting Mr. Blitzer to tell a lot of people to can it. With CNN's rules, I can see a lot of issues being addressed.
As a scientific experiment I'm going to watch the Republican debate and take a shot every time someone says "9/11"
And then if I am too drunk to go to work the next day some information can be gleaned from this.
Edit: I can see the headlines now. "Man dies from alcohol poisoning because rudy giuliani couldn't shut the fuck up about 9/11"
You are obligated to film this and put it on youtube.
Edit: Some more food for thought.
It's my duty as an american.
http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/191942
Skipping to the "good" part:
Cash money.
Then again, it also bugs me that people are willing to dismiss somebody for being Mormon, so who knows.
I don't care so much about that.
I do care about his "Thank God Bush is the president!" line he gives about 9/11. That just doesn't pass my bullshit test, plus it gives a clear "I'm stay the course" message.
But to be honest, all the Republican hopefuls are bad.
Really it's an early primary debate. Not even all the candidates are in yet and the most influential sources don't really do much at the debates. Believe it or not, the blogs and more arcane political sources have heavy influence now because the only people listening are really hardcore into politics.
I think we'll see a shift in the polling, Guiliani is doing alright now but when his positions get fleshed out he'll start dropping. His foreign policy is fine with Republicans, but his domestic stuff isn't. After 8 years of moderate Bush the primary voting Republicans aren't going to line up for that vote again.
Fred Thompson polls in the top three on the Republican side and he's not even officially in yet, his name is primarily out by the conservative grassroots movement, the blogs and some of the newsletters that circulate. The reports I keep reading about his position on many policies actually make me hopeful he'll finish getting into the race and we can really see his ideas and ideology tested with public debate.
The only thing that makes me think a McCain or Guiliani run is possible for the WH is that alot of people trust them more on foreign policy and national security than Hillary and Obama
Here is a website containing over 700 speeches and writings, including links to some of his books, some of which date back several decades.
Can you find something other then some ghost writer for something he had no control over? Now there are some radical, far out, and some crazy (and crazy awesome) ideas he's written and spoke about. But the acquisition that he is a racist is unfounded. I know, because I've only been reading his works, and listening to his speeches for about 7 years longer then you have. This post says all that needs to be said on it. And this one.
You post on a forum. How can you not recognize that Republican Anti-blackism from 1990 onward is not bigotry, not racism, but TROLLING? It is designed to incense, to bait, and to bring about all the same actions as any other troll does, for all the same reasons. And even if it's not trolling, the specific nature of it is better explained as part of the larger aspects of class warfare rather then entities of bigotry.
It took a fuck ton of work, effort, to go through google archives (archives of newsgroups that existed long before google) for copies of a long dead newsletter. It takes 10 seconds to pull up a half dozen articles on Ron Paul's political positions towards race in the country, all more recent and he actually wrote. Do the math. Ron Paul attracted too much attention with right leaning democrats for his anti-war pro liberty positions in the Republican debates, and the smear agents launched the typical racist smear that is done on all Republicans ever to run for office ever. It's become cliché, so much that I am surprised people even bother with it. It's also a cop-out for legitimate criticism of his policies and stances on racial issues.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it undermines legitimate debate about the policies of race in this nation. "Oh shit, they just accused that guy of bigotry... oh wait, no he put a couple black people into office, no way he can be a bigot, let's ignore his policies..." Do you see what it's done? It just encourages Republicans to promote a bizarre Affirmative-Action, where people are promoted to positions to prove that they care about diversity and are not racist... something the Republicans had complained about for years. You've solved nothing. Absolutely nothing by calling your opponent a bigot. By dragging things they never really stood for 20 years in the past, into debate about how things should be about the future of the country 20 months from now you add what? What was gained by the swift-boats? What was gained by the Bush national guard story? That it destroyed image? Character? But never ideas, because those are too fucking hard to debate.
I just want to say that Ron Paul looks damned scary at the top of that Ron Paul Library page. Like, holy shit. And regardless of the verdict you guys reach on his racism or lack thereof, he's a War on Christmas loon, thinks school prayer is 100% constitutional, and, right, wants to abolish the IRS stat. I guess I'm not really the target audience, though, and he does oppose the Patriot Act and some other good things-to-oppose.
edit: Katholic - that's classic.
I think the reason a lot of people do dismiss Mormon's because they assume anyone who is a mormom must be inherently stupid because their religion goes against historical facts.
As opposed to any other religion, ever? Religions are more about community and upbringing than they are about historical accuracy. And while I'm no expert on this, I'm fairly sure the mainstream Mormon church isn't teaching anything worse than mainstream Christianity or Judaism.
THANK YOU. Seriously, there are legitimate criticisms of Ron Paul, including his stance on Christianity and the government. Including his belief in abolishing the IRS (Which he openly stated in the first debate). Racism isn't one of them.
Because you setup a news letter to publish things in your name, then don't go to the effort to read the works before they hit the press. Negligence, and stupid, but it was 92 four years before he would think about running again, and four years after his last campaign. It nearly cost him in the 1996 election. I would love to meet the man in person and ask him questions like that (or at least get the full version of the Texas Monthly interview where they DID ask him), but it is probably not to be.
As opposed to having half a state named after a sitting senator who was an active Klan recruiter? That guy has a D beside his name.
I think it was a Democratic presidential candidate who talked about NY being Hymietown and the need to burn em out of black neighborhoods.
Strom Thurmond for his sins was also the first Senator to have a black person on his staff, he came a long way from his segregationist roots.
Race politics has gotten stupid in America (not that it ever was smart). In 2000 Bush was running for President and the NAACP ran an add associating him with the dragging murder of a black man in Texas for not passing a hate crimes law. Bush's reason for not supporting the law was because of the three men convicted of doing the murder, 2 were on death row and the third was sentenced to life with no parole. What were they going to do, kill em slower or twice? This from the same party that doesn't think the death penalty should even be allowed. It's weird to me.
Well Catholics, don't claim a literal translation of the bible. The Mormon church does claim that their texts are in fact literal fact. (I believe)
Edit: Of course this is probably the wrong thread to be discussing this