So, where do Republicans stand today?

[rightwinger]

I am starting to see a scenario where Rubio leads the ticket with either Fiorina or Kasich as VP

Polls do not matter at this time except for who is getting the money. Walker found out what happens to your contributions when you poll at 1%

Rubio is nowhere near seasoned enough.

VP, then President.

I agree....but on a stage full of Republicans, he seems like the only mature one in the group

I think he makes a good counter to Hillary. Young and dynamic vs tired and stale

He does not know the issues as well as Hillary, but appears to be a quick learner

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Jeb stands with the pope!

Jeb Bush: How Catholic faith changed my life - CNN.com

Yeah? ....Fuckem both.

 

[Disir]

Rubio often sounds like he is giving a summary for a class.

 

[g5000]

I am starting to see a scenario where Rubio leads the ticket with either Fiorina or Kasich as VP

Polls do not matter at this time except for who is getting the money. Walker found out what happens to your contributions when you poll at 1%

Rubio is nowhere near seasoned enough.

VP, then President.

I agree....but on a stage full of Republicans, he seems like the only mature one in the group

Yes, he came across very mature, except for the lame water bottle joke.

However, he has served less than one term in the Senate. How'd that work out for the last guy we elected who only served less than one term in the Senate?

Because of his inexperience, Obama gets his lunch eaten by Congress every day.

We need a guy with seasoning who can fight the fight with Congress. Rubio doesn't have that, yet. Kasich does, in spades.

I think he makes a good counter to Hillary. Young and dynamic vs tired and stale

We have to be careful he doesn't come across as TOO young. Then he's Dan Quayle all over again.

He does not know the issues as well as Hillary, but appears to be a quick learner

Hillary may know the issues, but her answers to them are too expensive.

 

[rightwinger]

I am starting to see a scenario where Rubio leads the ticket with either Fiorina or Kasich as VP

Polls do not matter at this time except for who is getting the money. Walker found out what happens to your contributions when you poll at 1%

Rubio is nowhere near seasoned enough.

VP, then President.

I agree....but on a stage full of Republicans, he seems like the only mature one in the group

Yes, he came across very mature, except for the lame water bottle joke.

However, he has served less than one term in the Senate. How'd that work out for the last guy we elected who only served less than one term in the Senate?

Because of his inexperience, Obama gets his lunch eaten by Congress every day.

We need a guy with seasoning who can fight the fight with Congress. Rubio doesn't have that, yet. Kasich does, in spades.

I think he makes a good counter to Hillary. Young and dynamic vs tired and stale

We have to be careful he doesn't come across as TOO young. Then he's Dan Quayle all over again.

He does not know the issues as well as Hillary, but appears to be a quick learner

Hillary may know the issues, but her answers to them are too expensive.

I like Kasich in that he seems capable of crossing the aisle

Whether Republicans would let him is another story

 

[Correll]

Says the man that voted for OBama, twice.

Obama was quite knowledgeable about foreign policy, his plans for healthcare, economic recovery

If you would like me to compare Carsons utterings to Obama in 2008. I would be glad to do it

Want to talk about Carson saying Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery? How about when he compared same sex marriage to bestiality and pedophilia?

Carson is not in Obamas league...th

He is a supposed Constitutional Law Professor who was surprised that the Supreme Court might invalidate a popular law that was passed by congress.

That's embarrassing.

Not really...that is why we have courts
A law is legal up until it is declared illegal

Those same courts have backed the legality of his actions....didn't see conservatives that happy about it

Yes, that is why we have courts. And Obama, the Law Professor did not know that.

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

 

[bendog]

I am starting to see a scenario where Rubio leads the ticket with either Fiorina or Kasich as VP

Polls do not matter at this time except for who is getting the money. Walker found out what happens to your contributions when you poll at 1%

Rubio is nowhere near seasoned enough.

VP, then President.

I agree....but on a stage full of Republicans, he seems like the only mature one in the group

Yes, he came across very mature, except for the lame water bottle joke.

However, he has served less than one term in the Senate. How'd that work out for the last guy we elected who only served less than one term in the Senate?

Because of his inexperience, Obama gets his lunch eaten by Congress every day.

We need a guy with seasoning who can fight the fight with Congress. Rubio doesn't have that, yet. Kasich does, in spades.

I think he makes a good counter to Hillary. Young and dynamic vs tired and stale

We have to be careful he doesn't come across as TOO young. Then he's Dan Quayle all over again.

He does not know the issues as well as Hillary, but appears to be a quick learner

Hillary may know the issues, but her answers to them are too expensive.

I like Kasich in that he seems capable of crossing the aisle

Whether Republicans would let him is another story

That's the thing. He (and Rubio to a lesser extent) are the cardboard cutout to replace Jeb. But, what if the base really wants to end birthright citizenship, which is probably impossible and at best a decade long effort with nothing done on immigration in the meantime; deport them all, which can't be done because we don't have the courtrooms to do it; end abortion over fetal tissue, which would merely end lower income women getting abortions and driving up the cost of fetal tissue; balance the budget by cutting all welfare to non-whites ...... and WORST OF ALL, rebel against the plutocrats's goals of enriching themselves at the cost of workers real wages?

 

[bendog]

Obama was quite knowledgeable about foreign policy, his plans for healthcare, economic recovery

If you would like me to compare Carsons utterings to Obama in 2008. I would be glad to do it

Want to talk about Carson saying Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery? How about when he compared same sex marriage to bestiality and pedophilia?

Carson is not in Obamas league...th

He is a supposed Constitutional Law Professor who was surprised that the Supreme Court might invalidate a popular law that was passed by congress.

That's embarrassing.

Not really...that is why we have courts
A law is legal up until it is declared illegal

Those same courts have backed the legality of his actions....didn't see conservatives that happy about it

Yes, that is why we have courts. And Obama, the Law Professor did not know that.

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

No, Obama feared a supreme court that did not have a Roberts as pragmatic as Owen Roberts.

The switch in time that saved nine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[rightwinger]

Obama was quite knowledgeable about foreign policy, his plans for healthcare, economic recovery

If you would like me to compare Carsons utterings to Obama in 2008. I would be glad to do it

Want to talk about Carson saying Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery? How about when he compared same sex marriage to bestiality and pedophilia?

Carson is not in Obamas league...th

He is a supposed Constitutional Law Professor who was surprised that the Supreme Court might invalidate a popular law that was passed by congress.

That's embarrassing.

Not really...that is why we have courts
A law is legal up until it is declared illegal

Those same courts have backed the legality of his actions....didn't see conservatives that happy about it

Yes, that is why we have courts. And Obama, the Law Professor did not know that.

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

 

[Correll]

He is a supposed Constitutional Law Professor who was surprised that the Supreme Court might invalidate a popular law that was passed by congress.

That's embarrassing.

Not really...that is why we have courts
A law is legal up until it is declared illegal

Those same courts have backed the legality of his actions....didn't see conservatives that happy about it

Yes, that is why we have courts. And Obama, the Law Professor did not know that.

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

Obamacare.

 

[rightwinger]

I am starting to see a scenario where Rubio leads the ticket with either Fiorina or Kasich as VP

Polls do not matter at this time except for who is getting the money. Walker found out what happens to your contributions when you poll at 1%

Rubio is nowhere near seasoned enough.

VP, then President.

I agree....but on a stage full of Republicans, he seems like the only mature one in the group

Yes, he came across very mature, except for the lame water bottle joke.

However, he has served less than one term in the Senate. How'd that work out for the last guy we elected who only served less than one term in the Senate?

Because of his inexperience, Obama gets his lunch eaten by Congress every day.

We need a guy with seasoning who can fight the fight with Congress. Rubio doesn't have that, yet. Kasich does, in spades.

I think he makes a good counter to Hillary. Young and dynamic vs tired and stale

We have to be careful he doesn't come across as TOO young. Then he's Dan Quayle all over again.

He does not know the issues as well as Hillary, but appears to be a quick learner

Hillary may know the issues, but her answers to them are too expensive.

I like Kasich in that he seems capable of crossing the aisle

Whether Republicans would let him is another story

That's the thing. He (and Rubio to a lesser extent) are the cardboard cutout to replace Jeb. But, what if the base really wants to end birthright citizenship, which is probably impossible and at best a decade long effort with nothing done on immigration in the meantime; deport them all, which can't be done because we don't have the courtrooms to do it; end abortion over fetal tissue, which would merely end lower income women getting abortions and driving up the cost of fetal tissue; balance the budget by cutting all welfare to non-whites ...... and WORST OF ALL, rebel against the plutocrats's goals of enriching themselves at the cost of workers real wages?

I think Republicans view birthright citizenship the same way they view abortion
An issue they trot out every four years

They know they can't change either

What Republicans want to do on immigration is create an unreachable goal....seal the border first
The border can never be sealed to their satisfaction. THis way they can put off taking any legal action regarding the 11 million already here

 

[rightwinger]

Not really...that is why we have courts
A law is legal up until it is declared illegal

Those same courts have backed the legality of his actions....didn't see conservatives that happy about it

Yes, that is why we have courts. And Obama, the Law Professor did not know that.

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

Obamacare.

Obama was right on Obamacare. The courts affirmed it ...TWICE
It is the Republicans who did not understand the law and tied up the courts

 

[Correll]

Yes, that is why we have courts. And Obama, the Law Professor did not know that.

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

Obamacare.

Obama was right on Obamacare. The courts affirmed it ...TWICE
It is the Republicans who did not understand the law and tied up the courts

YOu are purposefully dodging the point.

Before he won, he expressed surprise that having the Court throw out his law was even an option.

From a man that supposedly taught constitutional law.

That is an embarrassment to Obama, America, and the universities that passed him and employed him.

 

[rightwinger]

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

Obamacare.

Obama was right on Obamacare. The courts affirmed it ...TWICE
It is the Republicans who did not understand the law and tied up the courts

YOu are purposefully dodging the point.

Before he won, he expressed surprise that having the Court throw out his law was even an option.

From a man that supposedly taught constitutional law.

That is an embarrassment to Obama, America, and the universities that passed him and employed him.

Are you daft?
He is supposed to anticipate lawsuits from the right that have no merit?

 

[bendog]

Rubio is nowhere near seasoned enough.

VP, then President.

I agree....but on a stage full of Republicans, he seems like the only mature one in the group

Yes, he came across very mature, except for the lame water bottle joke.

However, he has served less than one term in the Senate. How'd that work out for the last guy we elected who only served less than one term in the Senate?

Because of his inexperience, Obama gets his lunch eaten by Congress every day.

We need a guy with seasoning who can fight the fight with Congress. Rubio doesn't have that, yet. Kasich does, in spades.

I think he makes a good counter to Hillary. Young and dynamic vs tired and stale

We have to be careful he doesn't come across as TOO young. Then he's Dan Quayle all over again.

He does not know the issues as well as Hillary, but appears to be a quick learner

Hillary may know the issues, but her answers to them are too expensive.

I like Kasich in that he seems capable of crossing the aisle

Whether Republicans would let him is another story

That's the thing. He (and Rubio to a lesser extent) are the cardboard cutout to replace Jeb. But, what if the base really wants to end birthright citizenship, which is probably impossible and at best a decade long effort with nothing done on immigration in the meantime; deport them all, which can't be done because we don't have the courtrooms to do it; end abortion over fetal tissue, which would merely end lower income women getting abortions and driving up the cost of fetal tissue; balance the budget by cutting all welfare to non-whites ...... and WORST OF ALL, rebel against the plutocrats's goals of enriching themselves at the cost of workers real wages?

I think Republicans view birthright citizenship the same way they view abortion
An issue they trot out every four years

They know they can't change either

What Republicans want to do on immigration is create an unreachable goal....seal the border first
The border can never be sealed to their satisfaction. THis way they can put off taking any legal action regarding the 11 million already here

I disagree. The plutocrats don't care about abortion But they trot it out every election.

But, the plutocrats don't want any laws punishing them from using illegal labor. Or, at least they want to be able to hire bricklayers and stone masons for minimum wage. That is, they got a dog in the fight. If we gave illegal workers legal status, they'd do things like file complaints for unpaid overtime. And even worse, if they were citizens. The Gop is right in that if immigrants see the dems making their lives better, they'll vote dem for two generations.

The plutocrats know we can't deport 11 million. They know a fence isn't gonna get built, because we can't afford the army. You're right, the border cannot be secured. Every recession, illegal immigration wanes. If we don't want them here, deny them jobs. But that is not what the plutocrats want.

So, the plutocrats do what they always do. They say, "the n9ggers (or whoever) are taking YOUR jobs. We should kick them all out of town (or the country in this case). "Let's build a wall." But anyone who suggests they stay (even at higher wages that may make our wages higher too) is against "us."

 

[bendog]

Didn't know what? How the Supreme Court will rule?

Half of all litigants in a case turn out to be wrong

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

Obamacare.

Obama was right on Obamacare. The courts affirmed it ...TWICE
It is the Republicans who did not understand the law and tied up the courts

YOu are purposefully dodging the point.

Before he won, he expressed surprise that having the Court throw out his law was even an option.

From a man that supposedly taught constitutional law.

That is an embarrassment to Obama, America, and the universities that passed him and employed him.

Well, the law was constitutional either as a commerce power exercise or a tax, but some of us considered that the Court might rule otherwise simply as a partisan issue. I'm not sure what's unclear to you about this. As a matter of how law is supposed to work, Obama understood it. Whether Roberts would abide was the question.

 

[Correll]

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

Obamacare.

Obama was right on Obamacare. The courts affirmed it ...TWICE
It is the Republicans who did not understand the law and tied up the courts

YOu are purposefully dodging the point.

Before he won, he expressed surprise that having the Court throw out his law was even an option.

From a man that supposedly taught constitutional law.

That is an embarrassment to Obama, America, and the universities that passed him and employed him.

Are you daft?
He is supposed to anticipate lawsuits from the right that have no merit?

I'm not sure how you are misunderstanding me.

Obama: Supreme Court overturning health care would be "unprecedented" - CBS News



"Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," Mr. Obama said in the Rose Garden appearance."



He did not understand the role of the Supreme Court, it's Powers, nor it's history.

This is embarrassing to Obama, America, and the universities that passed him and employed him.

 

[Correll]

No. By his expressed surprise that the Supreme Court might throw out his law, even though it was popular and passed by congress, he revealed that he did not know either the role of the Court or it's powers.

Which case are you talking about ? Obamacare? DOMA?

Obamacare.

Obama was right on Obamacare. The courts affirmed it ...TWICE
It is the Republicans who did not understand the law and tied up the courts

YOu are purposefully dodging the point.

Before he won, he expressed surprise that having the Court throw out his law was even an option.

From a man that supposedly taught constitutional law.

That is an embarrassment to Obama, America, and the universities that passed him and employed him.

Well, the law was constitutional either as a commerce power exercise or a tax, but some of us considered that the Court might rule otherwise simply as a partisan issue. I'm not sure what's unclear to you about this. As a matter of how law is supposed to work, Obama understood it. Whether Roberts would abide was the question.

I'm not sure how you are misunderstanding me.

Obama: Supreme Court overturning health care would be "unprecedented" - CBS News



"Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," Mr. Obama said in the Rose Garden appearance."



He did not understand the role of the Supreme Court, it's Powers, nor it's history.

This is embarrassing to Obama, America, and the universities that passed him and employed him.

 

[Disir]

um..........no. I could slam him all day long but that one really isn't an issue.

 

[rightwinger]

I agree....but on a stage full of Republicans, he seems like the only mature one in the group

Yes, he came across very mature, except for the lame water bottle joke.

However, he has served less than one term in the Senate. How'd that work out for the last guy we elected who only served less than one term in the Senate?

Because of his inexperience, Obama gets his lunch eaten by Congress every day.

We need a guy with seasoning who can fight the fight with Congress. Rubio doesn't have that, yet. Kasich does, in spades.

I think he makes a good counter to Hillary. Young and dynamic vs tired and stale

We have to be careful he doesn't come across as TOO young. Then he's Dan Quayle all over again.

He does not know the issues as well as Hillary, but appears to be a quick learner

Hillary may know the issues, but her answers to them are too expensive.

I like Kasich in that he seems capable of crossing the aisle

Whether Republicans would let him is another story

That's the thing. He (and Rubio to a lesser extent) are the cardboard cutout to replace Jeb. But, what if the base really wants to end birthright citizenship, which is probably impossible and at best a decade long effort with nothing done on immigration in the meantime; deport them all, which can't be done because we don't have the courtrooms to do it; end abortion over fetal tissue, which would merely end lower income women getting abortions and driving up the cost of fetal tissue; balance the budget by cutting all welfare to non-whites ...... and WORST OF ALL, rebel against the plutocrats's goals of enriching themselves at the cost of workers real wages?

I think Republicans view birthright citizenship the same way they view abortion
An issue they trot out every four years

They know they can't change either

What Republicans want to do on immigration is create an unreachable goal....seal the border first
The border can never be sealed to their satisfaction. THis way they can put off taking any legal action regarding the 11 million already here

I disagree. The plutocrats don't care about abortion But they trot it out every election.

But, the plutocrats don't want any laws punishing them from using illegal labor. Or, at least they want to be able to hire bricklayers and stone masons for minimum wage. That is, they got a dog in the fight. If we gave illegal workers legal status, they'd do things like file complaints for unpaid overtime. And even worse, if they were citizens. The Gop is right in that if immigrants see the dems making their lives better, they'll vote dem for two generations.

The plutocrats know we can't deport 11 million. They know a fence isn't gonna get built, because we can't afford the army. You're right, the border cannot be secured. Every recession, illegal immigration wanes. If we don't want them here, deny them jobs. But that is not what the plutocrats want.

So, the plutocrats do what they always do. They say, "the n9ggers (or whoever) are taking YOUR jobs. We should kick them all out of town (or the country in this case). "Let's build a wall." But anyone who suggests they stay (even at higher wages that may make our wages higher too) is against "us."

Agree that there is nothing in the Republican policies that punish employers at all

Spend billions building and manning a wall....but don't punish anyone who spends $4 an hour to hire a Mexican workforce

If the jobs go...the illegal workers go
No need for a wall