2016 is Going to Be A Game Changer

[GHook93]

My candidate is either Cruz or Paul so it pains me to say 2016 is going to hurt the conservative cause. I think the Dems grab the Presidency, senate and house.

President: the way the electoral colleges add up it is nearly impossible for a Rep to. That's a fact. Take a popular candidate like Clinton and no Rep has a chance.

House: it is always up for grabs and they always do better in presidential years.

Senate: The Dems have 10 seats up and the reps 24. Many are vulnerable like IL, PA and NH.

We can only hope something's remain the untouched.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Well convince your party to get their shit together before 2020. I've voted republican before, and I would be happy to see the GOP regain some sanity.

 

[1stRambo]

My candidate is either Cruz or Paul so it pains me to say 2016 is going to hurt the conservative cause. I think the Dems grab the Presidency, senate and house.

President: the way the electoral colleges add up it is nearly impossible for a Rep to. That's a fact. Take a popular candidate like Clinton and no Rep has a chance.

House: it is always up for grabs and they always do better in presidential years.

Senate: The Dems have 10 seats up and the reps 24. Many are vulnerable like IL, PA and NH.

We can only hope something's remain the untouched.

Yo, keep your American Integrity, we are Conservatives who support Ted Cruz, you go boy!!! Don`t every lose hope, we are the majority!!!

"GTP"

 

[Manonthestreet]

Hilly isnt popular....try to keep up

 

[ScienceRocks]

You might win if you ran on maintaining our infrastructure, our science institutions, r&d and reforming education. Right now, all you're doing is saying that we don't need none of them. People aren't going to support you while you promise a third world country for our future.

 

[nat4900]

I would agree with the O/P that the WH is almost a surety in Dems. hands.

In the Senate, with 24 GOP seats to defend, Dems. only need 4 or 5 wins to regain the majority(with only 4 wins needed if the VP is a Dem.)

The House, mostly because of redistricting by GOP-led state congresses, will remain in republicans hands.

 

[DarkFury]

I would agree with the O/P that the WH is almost a surety in Dems. hands.

In the Senate, with 24 GOP seats to defend, Dems. only need 4 or 5 wins to regain the majority(with only 4 wins needed if the VP is a Dem.)

The House, mostly because of redistricting by GOP-led state congresses, will remain in republicans hands.

If democrats cannot control the rioting in major cities they will lose those major cities.

 

[ScienceRocks]

If the gop wishes to win again I'd suggest going back to ACCOUNTABILITY and REFORM. We need to reform our educational system as it is failing to rank highly and that is hurting America. We need to demand that money that suppose to go to infrastructure, r&d and science goes directly to infrastructure, r&d projects and science. I think it is a shame how inefficient this country has become and how much fraud is all around

The gop shouldn't be the party that says I am against maintaining our infrastructure and our awesome science institutions, but the party that wants them to lead.

 

[Mad Scientist]

"Game Changer" Lol!

Politics is now discussed in Sports Analogies because that's all Americans seem to understand.

 

[Mac1958]

I suspect we'll look back one day and see that 2008 was the game-changer.

.

 

[guno]

I would agree with the O/P that the WH is almost a surety in Dems. hands.

In the Senate, with 24 GOP seats to defend, Dems. only need 4 or 5 wins to regain the majority(with only 4 wins needed if the VP is a Dem.)

The House, mostly because of redistricting by GOP-led state congresses, will remain in republicans hands.

The gerrymandering is being challenged successfully in the courts in a number of states

They have to get rid of the social conservatives and go back to their roots as fiscal conservatives

 

[GHook93]

Well convince your party to get their shit together before 2020. I've voted republican before, and I would be happy to see the GOP regain some sanity.

What would that sanity look like to you? Please explain.

 

[GHook93]

My candidate is either Cruz or Paul so it pains me to say 2016 is going to hurt the conservative cause. I think the Dems grab the Presidency, senate and house.

President: the way the electoral colleges add up it is nearly impossible for a Rep to. That's a fact. Take a popular candidate like Clinton and no Rep has a chance.

House: it is always up for grabs and they always do better in presidential years.

Senate: The Dems have 10 seats up and the reps 24. Many are vulnerable like IL, PA and NH.

We can only hope something's remain the untouched.

Yo, keep your American Integrity, we are Conservatives who support Ted Cruz, you go boy!!! Don`t every lose hope, we are the majority!!!

"GTP"
View attachment 45249

Cruz or Paul would be great choices, but be honest. We are not the majority and we're in for a beating.

 

[Nyvin]

The House will probably stay Republican majority until at least 2022.

The Presidency and Senate could very well go Dem, I'd say the Democrats have the advantage for President.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I suspect we'll look back one day and see that 2008 was the game-changer.

.

You did it again. You said something extremely vague in an attempt to present yourself as a deep thinker. Nobody knows what your point is here, genius. You will need to explain your comment a bit further.

Why will we look back one day and see that 2008 was the game changer?

 

[GHook93]

I suspect we'll look back one day and see that 2008 was the game-changer.

.

You did it again. You said something extremely vague in an attempt to present yourself as a deep thinker. Nobody knows what your point is here, genius. You will need to explain your comment a bit further.

Why will we look back one day and see that 2008 was the game changer?

Assume that is when we found out that in a national election no matter how bad the Democratic candidate is he will never lose.

 

[Mac1958]

I suspect we'll look back one day and see that 2008 was the game-changer.

.

You did it again. You said something extremely vague in an attempt to present yourself as a deep thinker. Nobody knows what your point is here, genius. You will need to explain your comment a bit further.

Why will we look back one day and see that 2008 was the game changer?

Assume that is when we found out that in a national election no matter how bad the Democratic candidate is he will never lose.

GHook93, my little stalker friend's obedient adherence to his hardcore partisan ideology has rendered him virtually devoid of intellectual elasticity.

Gee, let's see, on a thread about the freakin' 2016 elections, Mac refers to 2008!

Well, how weird! I don't get it! Just what could he possibly be talking about?

Too fuckin' funny.



.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We were a better country when we could work together and do something constructive. Now we have too loon parties with the extremes of each running things.

We can't cut and we can't make it anymore more gay...Understand?

 

[LoneLaugher]

I suspect we'll look back one day and see that 2008 was the game-changer.

.

You did it again. You said something extremely vague in an attempt to present yourself as a deep thinker. Nobody knows what your point is here, genius. You will need to explain your comment a bit further.

Why will we look back one day and see that 2008 was the game changer?

Assume that is when we found out that in a national election no matter how bad the Democratic candidate is he will never lose.

GHook93, my little stalker friend's obedient adherence to his hardcore partisan ideology has rendered him virtually devoid of intellectual elasticity.

Gee, let's see, on a thread about the freakin' 2016 elections, Mac refers to 2008!

Well, how weird! I don't get it! Just what could he possibly be talking about?

Too fuckin' funny.



.

You still haven't said a thing. You are so mysterious.

Why, Mac......will we look at 2008 as being the game changer? Any thoughts?

 

[LoneLaugher]

I suspect we'll look back one day and see that 2008 was the game-changer.

.

You did it again. You said something extremely vague in an attempt to present yourself as a deep thinker. Nobody knows what your point is here, genius. You will need to explain your comment a bit further.

Why will we look back one day and see that 2008 was the game changer?

Assume that is when we found out that in a national election no matter how bad the Democratic candidate is he will never lose.

Is that right? Do you think that is what Mac meant? Or...are you just guessing?