bbedward Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/03/politics/rand-paul-dropping-out-of-presidential-race/index.html Certainly the best candidate that the right had to offer. Too bad the primary voter base would rather choose slimy canadian-born Harvard lawyers that sleep with Goldman Sachs and pull "Hillary Clinton Tricks" - just because he yells about christianity every other word and believes we should be a theocracy. Even Carson was awake long enough to complain about the Clinton-Tricks pulled by Cruz: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/267996-carson-rips-dishonest-culture-of-cruz-campaign I was hoping for a Paul/Sanders election, I think the debates would have been worth watching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/03/politics/rand-paul-dropping-out-of-presidential-race/index.html Certainly the best candidate that the right had to offer. Too bad the primary voter base would rather choose slimy canadian-born Harvard lawyers that sleep with Goldman Sachs and pull "Hillary Clinton Tricks" - just because he yells about christianity every other word and believes we should be a theocracy. Even Carson was awake long enough to complain about the Clinton-Tricks pulled by Cruz: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/267996-carson-rips-dishonest-culture-of-cruz-campaign I was hoping for a Paul/Sanders election, I think the debates would have been worth watching. Far better and more interesting/educated/well conducted than a trump/clinton debate, I don't doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Far better and more interesting/educated/well conducted than a trump/clinton debate, I don't doubt. Trump/Clinton or Trump/Sanders would be quite entertaining though. I'm hoping for Trump/Sanders at this point. Paul/Sanders would have been the most substantial because they are ideologically opposites. Although both are into more non-interventionist foreign policies which is something every American should get behind IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Who was at fault for saying that Carson was dropping out of the race? CNN made that announcement. I would not blame the Cruz campaign for relaying that as sure it helps them but they didn't lie about it they just said what CNN had reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Trump/Clinton or Trump/Sanders would be quite entertaining though. I'm hoping for Trump/Sanders at this point. Paul/Sanders would have been the most substantial because they are ideologically opposites. Although both are into more non-interventionist foreign policies which is something every American should get behind IMO. It's the kind of choice you should have in presidential elections. People shouldn't be running on a platform of 'fix the corruption' - that's for places like India, or Africa. Not the 'world's greatest country' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 It's the kind of choice you should have in presidential elections. People shouldn't be running on a platform of 'fix the corruption' - that's for places like India, or Africa. Not the 'world's greatest country' Which reminds me, have you seen the Donald Trump - African Dictator thing Trevor Noah did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 sad to see Rand go. I hope Bloomberg runs and picks him as his VP. Now that will be a ticket I will vote for in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Post Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Rand is a Kentucky fellow too bad he isn't Henry Clay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Who was at fault for saying that Carson was dropping out of the race? CNN made that announcement. I would not blame the Cruz campaign for relaying that as sure it helps them but they didn't lie about it they just said what CNN had reported. They said Carson was taking a trip to Florida after the Caucus. Cruz campaign said "CARSON IS OUT! MAY MAKE A GREAT VP FOR #TedCruz2016" If you think they honestly jumped on it then you're crazy, CNN is just the excuse with Cruz campaign "misinterpreting" Cruz campaign even blamed Trump for saying Carson was out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 They said Carson was taking a trip to Florida after the Caucus. Cruz campaign said "CARSON IS OUT! MAY MAKE A GREAT VP FOR #TedCruz2016" If you think they honestly jumped on it then you're crazy, CNN is just the excuse with Cruz campaign "misinterpreting" Cruz campaign even blamed Trump for saying Carson was out. I watched Carson speak about this on Bill O'Reilly last night and OReilly was trying to nail down who was really at fault here..Cruz or What CNN reported. Carson himself did not know what CNN had reported. If CNN did not report that Carson was dropping out of the race then I do blame the Cruz campaign. Even as a Cruz supporter I would not condone this as even if Cruz apologizes now it is too late the primary is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 I watched Carson speak about this on Bill O'Reilly last night and OReilly was trying to nail down who was really at fault here..Cruz or What CNN reported. Carson himself did not know what CNN had reported. If CNN did not report that Carson was dropping out of the race then I do blame the Cruz campaign. Even as a Cruz supporter I would not condone this as even if Cruz apologizes now it is too late the primary is over. Cruz campaign manager blamed Trump (then deleted the tweet), then the campaign did apologize. The question is whether or not 5000 evangelicals shifted for Cruz instead of Carson because of what they were told or read as they were getting ready to caucus. CNN report just said he was going to Florida to get a fresh set of clothes before NH or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Cruz campaign manager blamed Trump (then deleted the tweet), then the campaign did apologize. The question is whether or not 5000 evangelicals shifted for Cruz instead of Carson because of what they were told or read as they were getting ready to caucus. CNN report just said he was going to Florida to get a fresh set of clothes before NH or something. We will never know but the last polling before the Iowa caucus had Carson polling at 10 percent and he ended up with 9 percent of the vote. I agree though Cruz's campaign manager should be held accountable. If CNN actually reported Carson was dropping out then the fault would lie with CNN but that is not what CNN reported so again even as a Cruz supporter this is wrong. Cruz did apologize to Carson but the damage is done, the primary is over and we will not know how much impact it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Either way, you should be responsible for your own actions. A little fact checking goes a very, very long way, yet seems completely alien to most politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Cruz is slimy and watching his interactions with his family are bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Cruz campaign manager blamed Trump (then deleted the tweet), then the campaign did apologize. The question is whether or not 5000 evangelicals shifted for Cruz instead of Carson because of what they were told or read as they were getting ready to caucus. CNN report just said he was going to Florida to get a fresh set of clothes before NH or something. With all the problems of having a caucus such as Clinton winning on coin tosses maybe Iowa should look into doing things differently. I think they should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 With all the problems of having a caucus such as Clinton winning on coin tosses maybe Iowa should look into doing things differently. I think they should. All states that do Caucuses should look into doing things differently. Caucuses are basically active campaign sites. You get Bernie people speaking, Hillary people speaking, Cruz/Trump/Bush/Rubio people speaking. They all yell at each other and try to convince you to vote for their candidate. Personally I just want to walk in, show my id, write my candidate and leave without talking to anybody - like it is mostly everywhere else. Active campaigning at voting locations is usually not allowed for pretty good reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 hope Bloomberg and Rand wipe the floor with Trump and Clinton in the general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 I would like to see some national standards on voting and getting uniformity with all the states. Too many states do things differently and even counties within states. Many times it isn't a problem but when elections are close they are really open to corruption such as how they recount votes. It should have been done after 2000 when we had the controversy in Florida. In Florida we had the ridiculous photos of people with magnifying glasses looking at voting cards trying to see if there was any kind of indentation and trying many times to figure out voter intent. I had no problem with the old punch ballots myself. It should have been easy to decide what vote counts even if a card wasn't punched all the way through if it was punched enough for any daylight count it but if it was just an indentation or mark it doesn't count. I never saw the need for electronic voting which comes with it's own set of problems. Too many times we make things harder than they should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 But your country is essentially a conglomerate of fiercely independent countries, that hate being told to do something a different way, especially if it's the 'national' way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 hope Bloomberg and Rand wipe the floor with Trump and Clinton in the general. Wish in one hand s**t in the other and see which one fills up faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 But your country is essentially a conglomerate of fiercely independent countries, that hate being told to do something a different way, especially if it's the 'national' way. But in the presidential race it is a national election. I believe in states rights but having national uniform voting makes sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 But in the presidential race it is a national election. I believe in states rights but having national uniform voting makes sense to me. Absolutely, I agree, but good luck trying to get all fifty states to agree on something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Absolutely, I agree, but good luck trying to get all fifty states to agree on something. Yeah it would be hard because each party would want things that would work to their advantage. I for one would want to see voter ID as a requirement which seems reasonable but there would be some claiming voter ID requirement depresses turnout and there probably would not be a consensus even on things that just seem to be common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Yeah it would be hard because each party would want things that would work to their advantage. I for one would want to see voter ID as a requirement which seems reasonable but there would be some claiming voter ID requirement depresses turnout and there probably would not be a consensus even on things that just seem to be common sense. Well voter ID is fine, but if you then start charging people for voter ID it's not fine, because you're putting up a barrier to entry that can't necessarily be cleared. But if you have free voter ID, then no problem. Enter republicans, who kick up a fuss about paying for something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-35485541 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Well voter ID is fine, but if you then start charging people for voter ID it's not fine, because you're putting up a barrier to entry that can't necessarily be cleared. But if you have free voter ID, then no problem. Enter republicans, who kick up a fuss about paying for something. I would be for free voter ID for those who need it. There are still those who would not want voter ID requirement even if states offered free ID. To me the reason is obvious, they aren't concerned about illegal voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 I assume many states have some sort of free identification cards, no? Maybe I should look it up. However people get crazy about this. Years ago I saw a piece on TV and the cards cost like a dollar or two and the demagogue was ranting about one of the impossible hill that was to climb for the destitute citizens of the state. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 3, 2016 Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 I assume many states have some sort of free identification cards, no? Maybe I should look it up. WSS WV offers them for free due to many of the elderly folks being on limited means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2016 Ohio ID card costs like $8 I think if everybody pinches their pennies and saves really hard for a a few months maybe they can afford one. Most states are cheap like that - in the $5-10 range. Some like Alabama are high at $30+, but voter ID cards are free. --- You can also usually identify with anything that has your name address on it in most places. Sealed mail, pay slips, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 4, 2016 Report Share Posted February 4, 2016 Maybe they could create a smartphone app for it. Since well, you know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.