207 replies to this topic

[Smurthwaite]

I not willing to discount what Deathmerchant is saying, but I am certainly not willing to lend it credibility without several sources (and given the nature of this discussion, they would have more credibility if they came from across the political perspective).

[Lysistrata]

They were chemical weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0#

 

It is strongly believed that Saddam moved most of his WMD's into Syria before the invasion. Sat photos showed huge trucks moving into Syria, but proof has never been published. That whole Obama "no boots on the ground" in Syria tells me he doesn't want anyone to know where the chemical weapons Assad is using, came from.

[Road2Victory]

They were chemical weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0#

 

It is strongly believed that Saddam moved most of his WMD's into Syria before the invasion. Sat photos showed huge trucks moving into Syria, but proof has never been published. That whole Obama "no boots on the ground" in Syria tells me he doesn't want anyone to know where the chemical weapons Assad is using, came from.

That could be the same for ISIS/ISIL as well. 

[DeathMerchant]

The chemical weapons found were likely older. Leftover from Iraq’s war with Iran, and not newer weapons as President Bush had suggested.

 

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/02/iraq-had-wmds-after-all.php

[Rhizoctonia]

https://www.facebook.com/tony.navarro.5872/videos/992656274080905/?fref=nf

 

Not sure if people can seee this, thought was funny

[Road2Victory]

https://www.facebook.com/tony.navarro.5872/videos/992656274080905/?fref=nf

 

Not sure if people can seee this, thought was funny

LOL

[Lysistrata]

I've been holding back and just watching how this plays out. The Clintons' have more scandal around them than any other power couple in history, but Democrats never seem to hold any of their people accountable for what they do. So what does our resident Liberals, or Clinton supporters, think about the Clintons' now? Are you finally gonna take out your trash?

[Shahenshah]

IMO Clinton's carry a lot of baggage and their image has more or less been formed and it'll be hard to breakthrough with the marketing campaign (aka election campaign).

On the otherside, I think Jeb Bush will break through, rest of the pack carries at least an image of a lot of radical right wing strands that could be in conflict with more mainstream views. But IMO that is something of wait and see situation.

Hillary just comes off as someone living in ivory tower trying to hoodwink people into thinking she's just like your average Joe.

Its amazing Democrats at the moment have no viable alternative at this point in time, so my question is, is this usual? Is there a precedent beyond the Obamas first win to an extent?

[Lysistrata]

It's very unusual. Democrats decided on Hillary the day she pulled out of the 2008 election, and it has never changed. She took full advantage, cleared the floor, and made sure no one would have the ground to stand on to oppose her. They may come up with a fake candidate to create an illusion of a candidate, but it would be a dog and pony show and not a serious attempt to earn the nomination. Hillary should walk to the Democrat nomination and she will be soundly routed in the general because people forget how much they don't like her... and then she talks, and laughs, and lies her way to 40% support.

 

I don't think Jeb will get off the ground. As soon as the donors see how the voters feel about having a third Bush, they will leave him as fast as they came. I like Walker... Governors make the best Presidents, but Marco is, and has always been, a very impressive candidate. Scott Walker and Marco Rubio have never lost an election, and I believe a least one on them will be on the ticket. Many are saying that Marco Rubio is the fresh face of the new Republicans. I believe they are correct.

[Shahenshah]

I feel Jeb has good connections and experienced network of people to get him through, something other candidates don't. As far as positions are concerned, I honestly believe they get calibrated as per where cabdidates feel they can grab the votes. Ted Cruz would goto a gay household to get the money and next day say things that the gays would find discriminating and offensive.

So I feel Jeb has the unique resource of experienced networks that others don't have necessarily.

I think the finals would be between Rubio and Jeb, others won't make through due to Latino swing vote.

The youth vote and Latino votes could be the key. So in that sense you're right , Marc could get ahead.

Edited by Shahenshah, 28 April 2015 - 03:12 PM.

[The Warrior]

Mike Huckabee has announced his campaign. I'm excited about it.

[onbekende]

I recall that name from a previous presidentional run, why he dropped out then?

[The Warrior]

Huckabee was a candidate in the 2008 election but resigned his campaign to the eventual Republican nominee, John McCain.

[Lysistrata]

Huckabee was a candidate in the 2008 election but resigned his campaign to the eventual Republican nominee, John McCain.

Huck never quit the race in 08, Romney dropped and Mike was able to actually claim that he came second to McCain. He won 8 states and did very well. His announcement speech, as always, was off the chart. He speaks straight from the heart, never uses a teleprompter, and will strike fear in the establishment. I hope he catches fire because I absolutely love his tax reform plan.

[onbekende]

awwww, an ex presidentional candidate who just didn't get the ticket? I was hoping for some hilarious scandal making him drop out

[Lysistrata]

awwww, an ex presidentional candidate who just didn't get the ticket? I was hoping for some hilarious scandal making him drop out

Yes, Huck did come second. He is an ex-candidtate that just didn't get the ticket. But there is another ex-candidate that came second and just didn't get the ticket... Hillary Clinton, and she really does have many hilarious scandals... as in, plural.

[The Warrior]

 

Huckabee was a candidate in the 2008 election but resigned his campaign to the eventual Republican nominee, John McCain.

Huck never quit the race in 08, Romney dropped and Mike was able to actually claim that he came second to McCain. He won 8 states and did very well. His announcement speech, as always, was off the chart. He speaks straight from the heart, never uses a teleprompter, and will strike fear in the establishment. I hope he catches fire because I absolutely love his tax reform plan.

I'm with you. Hopefully he gains traction.

[Third King]

Who's got the best shot against Hilary? 

[onbekende]

 

awwww, an ex presidentional candidate who just didn't get the ticket? I was hoping for some hilarious scandal making him drop out

Yes, Huck did come second. He is an ex-candidtate that just didn't get the ticket. But there is another ex-candidate that came second and just didn't get the ticket... Hillary Clinton, and she really does have many hilarious scandals... as in, plural.

 

depends what you call a scandal tbh, a quick skim thruw his wiki shows he likes them creation.

 

still, I'd hope he did something really wacky and not just be the second violin to a presidentional run some time ago.

 

2008 McCain you say? wasn't that the one with Ms "I know them russians cause I can see them from my home" Palin?

[Lysistrata]

So because Huck believes in God it disqualifies him as a candidate? News flash... all our Presidents have claimed to believe in God. Sarah is from Alaska, and was obviously talking about how close Alaska is to Russia... but you guys hear things the way you want to hear them, right? Is that what you call... a scandal? How about a billion dollars of foreign donations?