I feel sorry for Democrat voters.

[WillMunny]

As repellent as this ex-democrat finds the Obama "RMS Titanic" party to be, I would still pefer "the Bernnn" over Hillary, who exudes more oozing slime than the creatures in the Alien Sigourney Weaver movies. Bernie's an old crank, but at least he seems to have a heart & soul, and is more respectable as a human being. Hillary, on the other hands, is the purest psychopath I've seen since Hannibal Lecter & South Park's Eric Cartman.

Well, that and Bernie is bat shit crazy!

I know he's batshit crazy, but given the choice I prefer regular nuttiness over a cold-blooded, inhuman psychopath like Hillary (who even manages to make her sleazebag husband seem benign compared to her). Whatever his many flaws are, Bernie is human and Hillary is not.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[hazlnut]

They only have two shitty choices.

1. A woman who likely belongs in jail who's only accomplishment in life was being born a woman.

2. A complete loon.

Poor gramps, gonna buy the farm when America is on an upswing.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"I feel sorry for Democrat voters."

That's idiotic – particularly given the fact there's no such thing as 'democrat voters.'

Otherwise, you and others on the right need to put down the stones – you live in a very large glass house.

 

[peach174]

"I feel sorry for Democrat voters."

That's idiotic – particularly given the fact there's no such thing as 'democrat voters.'

Otherwise, you and others on the right need to put down the stones – you live in a very large glass house.

What is wrong with democracy, because that is what the word means
democrat

1.an advocate of democracy.
2. a member of the Democratic Party.


One person - democrat

Name of the party; Democratic Party

 

[initforme]

If the GOP came up with a viable candidate democrats might vote differently. But if trump doesn't get the nomination we are looking at coo coo Cruz or establishment rubio. Not rexactly good choices.

 

[MarcATL]

They don't seem to care. I guess their party didn't want them too have to strain over having to choose from too many people. So they picked them for them and said, here they are take it or shove it

They only have two shitty choices.

1. A woman who likely belongs in jail who's only accomplishment in life was being born a woman.

2. A complete loon.

I agree with you Grampa, but we also have problems of our own, lol. We have a GOP establishment, with the help of the Democrats, who are going to try and force Rubio down our throats.

If we elect Rubio, the Democrats prophecy of the GOP will come to pass, as he will just be the placeholder for the next Democratic President in 20, or at best 24. After that, it will be over.

Nothing significant economically will change under Rubio, most will stay as it is. The only good part is we might take a pause from going left, but to think the same problems we face today will change is a pipe dream; and that is exactly what the left wants if they are forced to lose the election.

Obama was their agent of change to push this country as far left as possible. Is Rubio the answer to push it back? If the establishment of both party's have their way, we will have a choice of moving much further left, or running in place till the Democrats get another chance in 20.

In my humble opinion, we need a better choice than that!

Absolutely. Please.....run "the experiment". Run your biggest nutbag. You have two remaining. Cruz and Carson. Good luck. I mean that.

Now Lone, the question remains...............is it all about winning, or is it all about addressing the citizens concerns as proven by the polls? I am not suggesting they go off the reservation because I think they should; I am rather suggesting that they run someone who addresses the questions most Americans are asking.

You can call these people anything you want, but poll after poll shows what Americans are thinking, wanting, and fearing. Why not make a Presidential election about that, instead of making it about 2 party's that have cleaned Americas clock for 2 decades, and got us in this malaise we are in now?

I know, novel concept; but it appears that neither establishment group wants to have that conversation. Why do you think that is?

Let me try again. It's a futile effort, I know. But I will try.

What "most Americans" fear...think and want.....in your world....is engineered bullshit.

For nearly 4 decades now, several very opportunistic and very effective men (mostly) with microphones have colluded with a few obscenely wealthy men (exclusively) to lead a large number of people to believe shit that is not true. These people have taken over your party leadership. This isn't me guessing. It's a fact. And....there is no comparable entity on the left.

In fact, the very idea that......the people who would support that which guys like Ted Cruz or Ben Carson stand for.....represent anything close to a majority of Americans is just another lie that you have been led to believe.

The Democratic Party is about to nominate a candidate whose policy positions represent at least most of what American liberals stand for. I'm not a democrat. I won't be voting in a primary. But....I can say without hesitation that either of the two remaining Democrats is qualified and capable of promoting the policies that I believe will move the nation forward.

It's fashionable to throw your hands up and say "they are all just corrupt liars and they are all in it together against the people". But....that's bullshit. In the end, our politicians are held to account by the ballot box. It's not pretty.....and the money in politics certainly makes the water murky....but it's not a lost cause.

I love that you included "fear" along with "want" and "need". It's very appropriate. Frightened people don't make good decisions. Fortunately, most Americans are not frightened.

Powerful.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[amrchaos]

If the GOP came up with a viable candidate democrats might vote differently. But if trump doesn't get the nomination we are looking at coo coo Cruz or establishment rubio. Not rexactly good choices.

The moderate the Republican, the more likely a democrat will vote for him.

That is why Rubio does better than Cruz or Trump in the generals

And Kasich,the fiscal conservative, does the best out of the GOP field.

The GOP trying to win with their most conservative rightwing candidate is akin to Democrats trying to win the farthest left candidate they can find. It should not work.

 

[LoneLaugher]

If the GOP came up with a viable candidate democrats might vote differently. But if trump doesn't get the nomination we are looking at coo coo Cruz or establishment rubio. Not rexactly good choices.

The moderate the Republican, the more likely a democrat will vote for him.

That is why Rubio does better than Cruz or Trump in the generals

And Kasich,the fiscal conservative, does the best out of the GOP field.

The GOP trying to win with their most conservative rightwing candidate is akin to Democrats trying to win the farthest left candidate they can find. It should not work.

I'd consider voting for Kasich. I'm put off by his dopey Judeo-Christian Agency idea......but I Think he popped that trial balloon soon after he released it. Other than his insistence on telling everyone that Obama has been a poor president....which is standard pandering fare.....he's not said much that I can't work with.

Rubio isn't genuine and I don't think he's more intelligent than I am. I won't vote for someone who isn't clearly more intelligent than I am.

In my opinion....Rubio has polled better than Kasich for one reason. His stump speech angry in tone and is sufficiently insulting of the POTUS and Hillary Clinton. The GOP base MUST HAVE those two things. Otherwise....no go. It's not a good plan for the general, though.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"I feel sorry for Democrat voters."

That's idiotic – particularly given the fact there's no such thing as 'democrat voters.'

Otherwise, you and others on the right need to put down the stones – you live in a very large glass house.

What is wrong with democracy, because that is what the word means
democrat

1.an advocate of democracy.
2. a member of the Democratic Party.


One person - democrat

Name of the party; Democratic Party

The ignorance and stupidity exhibited by most on the right is truly amusing, this being one of many moronic examples.

 

[amrchaos]

If the GOP came up with a viable candidate democrats might vote differently. But if trump doesn't get the nomination we are looking at coo coo Cruz or establishment rubio. Not rexactly good choices.

The moderate the Republican, the more likely a democrat will vote for him.

That is why Rubio does better than Cruz or Trump in the generals

And Kasich,the fiscal conservative, does the best out of the GOP field.

The GOP trying to win with their most conservative rightwing candidate is akin to Democrats trying to win the farthest left candidate they can find. It should not work.

I'd consider voting for Kasich. I'm put off by his dopey Judeo-Christian Agency idea......but I Think he popped that trial balloon soon after he released it. Other than his insistence on telling everyone that Obama has been a poor president....which is standard pandering fare.....he's not said much that I can't work with.

Rubio isn't genuine and I don't think he's more intelligent than I am. I won't vote for someone who isn't clearly more intelligent than I am.

In my opinion....Rubio has polled better than Kasich for one reason. His stump speech angry in tone and is sufficiently insulting of the POTUS and Hillary Clinton. The GOP base MUST HAVE those two things. Otherwise....no go. It's not a good plan for the general, though.

The right o love an angry, insulting stump speech.

It is a complete turn off to me. Prefer a positive message an forward looking plans. Even if it comes out a little dopey.

 

[LoneLaugher]

If the GOP came up with a viable candidate democrats might vote differently. But if trump doesn't get the nomination we are looking at coo coo Cruz or establishment rubio. Not rexactly good choices.

The moderate the Republican, the more likely a democrat will vote for him.

That is why Rubio does better than Cruz or Trump in the generals

And Kasich,the fiscal conservative, does the best out of the GOP field.

The GOP trying to win with their most conservative rightwing candidate is akin to Democrats trying to win the farthest left candidate they can find. It should not work.

I'd consider voting for Kasich. I'm put off by his dopey Judeo-Christian Agency idea......but I Think he popped that trial balloon soon after he released it. Other than his insistence on telling everyone that Obama has been a poor president....which is standard pandering fare.....he's not said much that I can't work with.

Rubio isn't genuine and I don't think he's more intelligent than I am. I won't vote for someone who isn't clearly more intelligent than I am.

In my opinion....Rubio has polled better than Kasich for one reason. His stump speech angry in tone and is sufficiently insulting of the POTUS and Hillary Clinton. The GOP base MUST HAVE those two things. Otherwise....no go. It's not a good plan for the general, though.

The right o love an angry, insulting stump speech.

It is a complete turn off to me. Prefer a positive message an forward looking plans. Even if it comes out a little dopey.

Same here. A little creative humor is fun. But the full on " blah blah blah hates America blah blah blah feckless blah blah blah refuses to name the enemy blah blah blah worst Secretary of State in history" bullshit is boring.

Now....ask a "conservative" and they'll tell you that Obama and Hillary are both nastier and more insulting than any GOP candidate. It's incredible.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"I'd consider voting for Kasich"

Which is fine if one were just voting for Kasich.

But one isn't.

One is also voting for the scores of administrators who would make up his administration, many of whom would likely be Bush era retreads; a Kasich administration would also subject us to much of their same failed policies, along with their judicial appointments.

It's a pity that those who seem otherwise capable can't be considered because they're infected with the bane of social conservatism – such as Kasich, and who consequently can't be trusted.

 

[LoneLaugher]

"I'd consider voting for Kasich"

Which is fine if one were just voting for Kasich.

But one isn't.

One is also voting for the scores of administrators who would make up his administration, many of whom would likely be Bush era retreads; a Kasich administration would also subject us to much of their same failed policies, along with their judicial appointments.

It's a pity that those who seem otherwise capable can't be considered because they're infected with the bane of social conservatism – such as Kasich, and who consequently can't be trusted.

You make valid points.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

The conservative front runners are Trump-a bullshitter reality tv birther, and Cruz-a should be televangelist Canadian anchor baby.

Cruz would make a great televangelist. He's better at appealing to the rube-ish evangelical masses than anyone! He could have his one private 747 in no time!

English is not your first language?

Easier upkeep and maintenance if the Chair Force pays for it!

Them's fightin' words "squid."

LOL.

 

[MarcATL]

N

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk