Spock;1781235 wrote:you think your so smart about politics.....remember when you voted for Obama for his foreign policy experience (ended up being the worst presidents in a long time).....now HC is a better option that everyone else????

Heretic;1781174 wrote:Yeah, and at least I would go top 4, as there's something about Cruz that makes me want to obsessively cleanse myself every single time I see him or hear him speak. Slimeball zealot senses tingling, I guess.

It probably says a lot about the state of things when, on this site, most people either would support or at least tolerate a Rubio/Kasich sort of deal...while nationally, those two seem to be 3rd and (maybe) 4th on the R side because they either don't cater enough to the far right or aren't bombastic enough to get all the attention.

If anything, starting with roughly 4000 candidates was not the best idea. With that many people fighting for the spotlight, the quality got shunted to the side with the quantity, while the loudest and most intrusive got the attention.

rrfan;1781504 wrote:Copy the Cruz part for me...that guy has something that just makes my skin crawl.

ptown_trojans_1;1781298 wrote: Romney was not Presidential material and his ideas and foreign policy advisers were Neocons. So, yeah, Obama was the better choice I would say.

QuakerOats;1781549 wrote:You really did not just say that about Romney. My God he was THE most presidential candidate we have had in a long time. Smart, successful, articulate, generous, and genuine. We blew a great chance; we would be well on our way to repairing the damage obama inflicted.

superman;1781202 wrote:I've heard a lot of bullshit spin from you but this takes the cake. I know you're a shill for the Democratic party but wow.

QuakerOats;1781234 wrote:Hope that Christie, Fiorina, Carson supporters all go for Kasich and maybe he can make it a race (although I have no significant issues with Cruz and it would be fun to see him crush Clinton in the debates). Still hoping that we somehow arrive at Kasich/Rubio ticket ............... our best chance to win because its our best chance to win OH and FL, and we gotta have those states.

BoatShoes;1781707 wrote:Sanders (who I am a supporter of) is doing a service to political discourse by running but exhibits Ron/Rand level naivite IMHO.

like_that;1781508 wrote:I think any normal voter feels that way. It's pretty sad there isn't a front runner candidate for any of the normal voters (on both sides).

It makes me wonder if these wackos voting are now the majority of the country or we are just more likely to pass on voting if there isn't a legitimate candidate.

Apple;1781819 wrote:Former Miss Arkansas Sally Miller spoke with the Daily Mail. It seems she had a tryst with Bill back in the 90's when he was governor of Arkansas. She claims he put on her frilly nighty and danced around playing his sax. She also said Bill told her that HRC preferred female lovers. Miller says she sleeps with a loaded gun out of fear of what she knows.

link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3427366/He-frilly-nightie-danced-playing-sax-Former-Miss-Arkansas-says-Bill-Clinton-bed-confided-Hillary-sex-women-fears-Hillary-vendetta-sleeps-loaded-semi-automatic.html

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1781910 wrote:Clinton deadlocked tie with Sanders in Nevada after having a 40 pt lead originally.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1781910 wrote:Clinton deadlocked tie with Sanders in Nevada after having a 40 pt lead originally.

QuakerOats;1781911 wrote:She needs to come up with more 'free shit'

Con_Alma;1781925 wrote:No one's suggesting it can't go away but rather the here and now was referred to in Nevada. Nevada, New Hampshire, Iowa are all small potatoes when it comes to the electoral ticks needed.

Right now Ms. Clinton has the numbers.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1781935 wrote:My point is she loses ground to him at every location as their primary nears. So you'd expect to see similar things in those states too.