Jeb

[FA_Q2]

Below, you comment that people here are more engaged? If you honestly believe that (It's crap by the way) you would have to believe that those not here are less engaged. Well, what differentiates the two groups? A username, password, and interest in getting into the often unfair discourse. Seriously, do you think people are here to not "go there"?

What makes the people here differnt? Your kidding right? You must be joking?

If I go to a geological message board, the people there are going to be more engaged than the layman in geology. If I go to a hockey message board they are going to be more engaged. Why - because they are INTERESTED in it. That is a pretty simple concept. Most people don't care about politics at all. Its why so many people cant even name the three branches of government when they are asked - they simply don't care. When you don't care you are not engaged. The people here at least get on this board, sign up and talk about politics. They are interested. That does not make them right but it dies make them more involved. Its not 'crap,' its basic logic.

Sickening? Hardly. I think it's unrealistic to think that people should know more about the nuances of an agriculture bill than something that is entertaining such as football or where the NASCAR drivers are this weekend. Why? Because we live in an republic where we vote for representatives to vote on our behalf. We can measure the results. Reagan's great gift was that he could simplify the message. "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago." That is our litmus test when it comes down to it with a mix of "Watch out for the other guy..." If you're correct about anything, the "Watch out for the other guy" is where the voters get bamboozled by those seeking their support.

Never said they needed to understand the nuances. now you are arguing against a straw man. They need to understand the platform, policy and objectives of the candidates they are voting for. Most Americans simply do not.

Got some news for you. Obama is seen as the worst President in the history of the nation. Check that. He's seen as the worst executive in the history of the world. Check that. He's seen as the worst leader of any group of primates ever on the planet.

Not BY A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE ELECTORATE.

Do you even bother to read my posts?

If you actually believe that Rand Paul or Ted Cruz have a better chance than Jeb Bush with their lack of constituency and zero legislative record...

If you actually believe that Bobby Jindal or Rick Perry have a better chance than Jeb Bush with the electoral math available at this time...

And if you believe that the Senators Rubio, Portman, or even Ayotte are in the same league....

I don't know what to tell you. You're way off.

No, I'm not.

Zero chance is zero chance - no matter what psycho's name you place after 'candidate.'