|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
AMES, Iowa — The Republican Party must to do a better job reaching out to working class voters, former senator and GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum said Saturday.
The Iowa caucus winner said that by focusing on business owners in the last presidential election, the GOP failed to connect with "job holders" and "marginalized" a group of voters.
"We need to reject this idea that if we build the economy, all boats will rise. We need to talk about people who have holes in their boats, because we all do," Santorum said at the Family Leadership Summit, a conference of conservative Christians.
After his remarks, Santorum said he was open to another presidential run in 2016 but has made no decision.
Other speakers at the summit include Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and reality show star Donald Trump. The daylong event will be one of many cattle calls for potential candidates in the grueling runup to the 2016 presidential election.
Source
|
Hey look, GOP won't pass policy it supports!
Sahil Kapur has an insightful report showing just how this plan of action is working in practice. One of the glitches to emerge in Obamacare is that it does not deem many church health-insurance plans to be fully qualified under the law. As written, it would make them disband their insurance plans and put their employees on to the exchanges. Churches are urging a reform to fix this flaw, and Senators Mark Pryor and Chris Coons are sponsoring a bill to do just that.
But they can’t get a Republican sponsor and have no realistic hope of attracting any Republican support in the near future. “We’re not expecting it to get a vote — at least not anytime soon,” Coons’s spokesman tells Kapur.
The reason is that Republicans are following a strategy of withholding support for any bipartisan fixes to the law. They will vote to repeal or undermine Obamacare, but they won’t support any changes intended to improve its functioning. It’s a pure Leninist strategy — heighten the contradictions to help hasten the collapse they are certain is inevitable.
The same strategy undergirds the Republican campaign to refuse Medicaid. This is a pure case of pain-infliction by Republican-controlled states. They are turning down the federal government’s offer to pay 90 percent of the costs of Medicaid expansion, and thus leaving their poorest residents uninsured, as a sadistic display of resistance to the dread Obamacare.
|
As has been said many times before the Republican are not interested in fixing anything. They want Obama and anything he touches to fail regardless of reason or cost.
|
I'm just wondering, Bill Clinton was tried to be impeached for just a bj. On the other hand, Obama stands for PRISM and massive espionage scandal, why is he not impeached? Does he have too much support from his fellow party members?
|
On August 12 2013 00:27 darkness wrote:
I'm just wondering, Bill Clinton was tried to be impeached for just a bj. On the other hand, Obama stands for PRISM and massive espionage scandal, why is he not impeached? Does he have too much support from his fellow party members?
Clinton was impeached for perjury during a lawsuit. His testimony was false, which is illegal under oath. PRISM, on the other hand, has been upheld so far as a legal program under the Patriot Act. Obama has done nothing illegal (that we know of).
|
On August 12 2013 00:49 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 00:27 darkness wrote:
I'm just wondering, Bill Clinton was tried to be impeached for just a bj. On the other hand, Obama stands for PRISM and massive espionage scandal, why is he not impeached? Does he have too much support from his fellow party members? Clinton was impeached for perjury during a lawsuit. His testimony was false, which is illegal under oath. PRISM, on the other hand, has been upheld so far as a legal program under the Patriot Act. Obama has done nothing illegal (that we know of).
Isn't it still better to impeach him to restore the image of USA after PRISM scandal? Legal or not, can morality be a reason to do so?
|
On August 12 2013 00:54 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 00:49 aksfjh wrote:On August 12 2013 00:27 darkness wrote:
I'm just wondering, Bill Clinton was tried to be impeached for just a bj. On the other hand, Obama stands for PRISM and massive espionage scandal, why is he not impeached? Does he have too much support from his fellow party members? Clinton was impeached for perjury during a lawsuit. His testimony was false, which is illegal under oath. PRISM, on the other hand, has been upheld so far as a legal program under the Patriot Act. Obama has done nothing illegal (that we know of). Isn't it still better to impeach him to restore the image of USA after PRISM scandal? Legally or not, can morality be a reason to do so?
No and no.
|
Though you could charge the director of the NSA with perjury, considering he lied so many times to congress under oath.
|
On August 11 2013 23:27 DoubleReed wrote:Hey look, GOP won't pass policy it supports!Show nested quote +Sahil Kapur has an insightful report showing just how this plan of action is working in practice. One of the glitches to emerge in Obamacare is that it does not deem many church health-insurance plans to be fully qualified under the law. As written, it would make them disband their insurance plans and put their employees on to the exchanges. Churches are urging a reform to fix this flaw, and Senators Mark Pryor and Chris Coons are sponsoring a bill to do just that.
But they can’t get a Republican sponsor and have no realistic hope of attracting any Republican support in the near future. “We’re not expecting it to get a vote — at least not anytime soon,” Coons’s spokesman tells Kapur.
The reason is that Republicans are following a strategy of withholding support for any bipartisan fixes to the law. They will vote to repeal or undermine Obamacare, but they won’t support any changes intended to improve its functioning. It’s a pure Leninist strategy — heighten the contradictions to help hasten the collapse they are certain is inevitable.
The same strategy undergirds the Republican campaign to refuse Medicaid. This is a pure case of pain-infliction by Republican-controlled states. They are turning down the federal government’s offer to pay 90 percent of the costs of Medicaid expansion, and thus leaving their poorest residents uninsured, as a sadistic display of resistance to the dread Obamacare.
Why aren't the church plans qualified? Is this the birth control issue all over again?
|
Major announcement by Eric Holder is supposed to happen tomorrow. Said to be concerning drug policy but we have been down this road before.
|
This is just a random thought but I'm pretty sure Chris Christie is the only mainstream GOP candidate (that I can think of) who has a very competitive shot at beating the Dems next election.
Unless of course
1) Obama royally fucks up in the next few years
2)The Dems put forth as weak a primary lineup as the Reps did last election. However, with Clinton more or less the front runner, the chance of #2 are less likely.
Chris Christie is the only person that I find likeable, confident and thoughtful enough to not make "GOP 101" mistakes (e.g. 47%). I say this as a Dem... and i'm excited because I will be able to vote next go round!
|
On August 12 2013 04:54 darthfoley wrote:
This is just a random thought but I'm pretty sure Chris Christie is the only mainstream GOP candidate (that I can think of) who has a very competitive shot at beating the Dems next election.
Unless of course
1) Obama royally fucks up in the next few years
2)The Dems put forth as weak a primary lineup as the Reps did last election. However, with Clinton more or less the front runner, the chance of #2 are less likely.
Chris Christie is the only person that I find likeable, confident and thoughtful enough to not make "GOP 101" mistakes (e.g. 47%). I say this as a Dem... and i'm excited because I will be able to vote next go round!
Except the primaries don't work that way and the Tea Party is going to go full blown war on Christie if he does decide tor run, if primaries worked that the most electable would come out on top then we could have John Huntsman as President right now as the Obama Admin were truly worried that if he managed to come out on top they could easily lose. Except the crazies run the show now and only the most right wing or best actor wins only to lose the general.
|
On August 12 2013 04:54 darthfoley wrote:
This is just a random thought but I'm pretty sure Chris Christie is the only mainstream GOP candidate (that I can think of) who has a very competitive shot at beating the Dems next election.
Unless of course
1) Obama royally fucks up in the next few years
2)The Dems put forth as weak a primary lineup as the Reps did last election. However, with Clinton more or less the front runner, the chance of #2 are less likely.
Chris Christie is the only person that I find likeable, confident and thoughtful enough to not make "GOP 101" mistakes (e.g. 47%). I say this as a Dem... and i'm excited because I will be able to vote next go round!
Yes, I mostly identify as a liberal and will be able to vote in the next presidential election and I would vote for Christie over an Obama 2.0 He seems very genuine and like he could be a very good bipartisan leader, which is what we need. Obama couldn't do it because Republicans couldn't get behind him, but I think Dems could get behind Christie more easily.
|
Yep if things go like last time the far right side of the Republican base will force anyone to sway way to there side in order to win the primary while at the same time making them pretty much unelectable to the general public. Same thing happened to Romney. He had to compromise for the far right way to much which destroyed his ability to appeal to the undecided vote.
|
On August 12 2013 05:13 Gorsameth wrote:
Yep if things go like last time the far right side of the Republican base will force anyone to sway way to there side in order to win the primary while at the same time making them pretty much unelectable to the general public. Same thing happened to Romney. He had to compromise for the far right way to much which destroyed his ability to appeal to the undecided vote.
Honestly I got the opposite impression from Romney. I think he only acted liberal in Massachusetts, but he was actually always that conservative and plutocratic.
But then I really really didn't like Romney. I thought he would be significantly worse than Bush.
That said, I agree that Christie is probably the GOP's best bet. I don't think he'll do that badly in the primary. People say the GOP will attack him like where he hugged Obama, but honestly they have a few years to completely change tack if they want. It's not like people remember things anyway. 
|
Christie is the worst possible candidate for the GOP. hes just another liberal from the north western states that republicans won't go out to vote for and the democrats can find any reason to vote for the democrat. He has no chance of winning any real primary without the support of even the most moderate republican factions.
|
On August 12 2013 05:27 Sermokala wrote:
Christie is the worst possible candidate for the GOP. hes just another liberal from the north western states that republicans won't go out to vote for and the democrats can find any reason to vote for the democrat. He has no chance of winning any real primary without the support of even the most moderate republican factions.
You know, just because Republicans vote like that doesn't mean Democrats do. I know plenty of people that would give Christie a chance, who also voted Obama. Believe it or not, some people try to vote for the better guy, not just the color of the flag waving behind him.
|
On August 12 2013 04:54 darthfoley wrote:
This is just a random thought but I'm pretty sure Chris Christie is the only mainstream GOP candidate (that I can think of) who has a very competitive shot at beating the Dems next election.
Unless of course
1) Obama royally fucks up in the next few years
2)The Dems put forth as weak a primary lineup as the Reps did last election. However, with Clinton more or less the front runner, the chance of #2 are less likely.
Chris Christie is the only person that I find likeable, confident and thoughtful enough to not make "GOP 101" mistakes (e.g. 47%). I say this as a Dem... and i'm excited because I will be able to vote next go round!
You're making the mistake of thinking that because you like him, and think the rest of the possible candidates are stupid, that he is the only one with a chance.
Chris Christie has got almost no chance of getting through the primaries, and even less chance getting conservatives to come out and vote for him. If we run him, we'll just get a repeat of Romney/Ryan and conservatives will just stay home.
|
I still think McCain had a much better chance of winning if he ran as his formerly moderate self instead of selling out (though he still probably would have lost, albeit by a narrower margin). Remember when he first ran in the primaries against Bush and there were all those Democrats who changed their registration just to vote for him?
|
On August 12 2013 05:27 Sermokala wrote:
Christie is the worst possible candidate for the GOP. hes just another liberal from the north western states that republicans won't go out to vote for and the democrats can find any reason to vote for the democrat. He has no chance of winning any real primary without the support of even the most moderate republican factions.
Uhh... what? Where did you get that Christie is liberal?
Did you think Romney was liberal because he ran in Massachusetts??
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
