Way too early republican primary thread

nashhorn said:
Agree with this thread and its emphasis on both being hypocritical contemptible parties. However, I balk at the overspend 'under tax' contention. My position is we over spend and thus claim we are undertaxed. With a modicum of fiscal restraint we would have adequate taxation. Although not a member of the Tea party in any direct context I absolutely believe we (simple citizens) are taxed enough already. Not saying here there does not need be significant reformation of the tax code but revenue is not the problem.
I am ready to support anyone whose stance is staunch fiscal responsibility. Now trusting anyone who were to profess that however? Well that is another story.
Click to expand...

Nash,

The problem I have with this mindset is that it makes future generations bear the burden of our inability to bring down government spending. If we're borrowing money for day-to-day operations (as opposed to capital expenditures like roads and infrastructure) or emergencies and don't have the political resolve to cut spending, then yes, we are collectively undertaxed. We should have to pay for the government we demand. Any other approach tolerates trans-generational theft. If spending isn't cut, then I'd rather face a tax increase than steal it from my 16-month old son who had no say in the matter and derived no benefit from it.
 
I think that, except for our legislature, no person believes the burden we are putting onto the lives of my (our) grandchildren to be fair, nor honest.
I just feel if we enjoyed a legislature with any sense of fiscal responsibility revenue is not the problem, spending - both discretionary and nondiscretionary - is. To be sure I do feel there is a complete tax over-haul needed. I do not think this should be passed onto my grandkids but my solution is to force, somehow, the idiots to remove the absurd spending habits/policies. Because this responsible behavior is so foreign in today's Congress I say a third party may well be the only solution. Stranger things have happened, who'd have thought we'd get the Supremes sanctioning same sex marriage and saying words in a law don't matter just a few years ago?
 
So it's been a while but I thought this might be an interesting time to bump the thread. No real news with the Donald stealing headlines. Bush continues to do better than I thought. Anybody have opinions or predictions about where this is going? I honestly have no idea but the thought of Clinton/bush makes me sick.
 
I think the nomination comes down to the electable candidate (gulp!) Jeb Bush and the Tea Party favorite Ted Cruz. This is a tough choice for the Republicans. The extreme definitely wants and ideologue but know they can't win in a general election, even when the deck is stacked in their favor. So, they send their message in the primaries through a strong showing by Cruz. He's the only one without major warts that could fit that ideologue label.
 
HornHuskerDad said:
Maybe we should demand less government.
Click to expand...

We should, but that's not really the issue. The issue is what happens when we lose the battle to demand less. For the most part, the GOP's priority has been to avoid tax increases at all costs and above all other priorities, even if it means running up big deficits. I think that is unfair to the next generation. Furthermore, I think that a big reason why it's hard to build public support to cut spending is that the public doesn't have to pay for it. Make them pay for it, and they'll think twice before creating new government programs. I think that's a big reason why state governments with balanced budget requirements tend to have more fiscal restraint than the federal government does.
 
Mr. Deez said:
We should, but that's not really the issue. The issue is what happens when we lose the battle to demand less. For the most part, the GOP's priority has been to avoid tax increases at all costs and above all other priorities, even if it means running up big deficits. I think that is unfair to the next generation. Furthermore, I think that a big reason why it's hard to build public support to cut spending is that the public doesn't have to pay for it. Make them pay for it, and they'll think twice before creating new government programs. I think that's a big reason why state governments with balanced budget requirements tend to have more fiscal restraint than the federal government does.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Great post, Deez.
 
Great article on John Kasich. Why some people have a big hard-on for Donald Trump while Kasich barely registers in the polls shows what's wrong with politics (especially Republican politics) nowadays. Trump is a smack-talking lowlife, and Kasich is a decent man of accomplishment. He balanced the friggin' budget.
 
My mind wandered as I watched Trump say he was for honoring war heroes who didn't get captured. I wonder how well he'd do if his pivate jet was hit with a SAM, both arms and a leg broken and armed hostiles pulled him out of the water after he almost drown. Personally, I think Trump could bluster his way out of problems or pull an Iron Man and jet out of there is a space age suit. What do you think? Too bad the services lost a soldier of Trump's caliber because he had to stay home and attend college while courageously battling a bone spur.
 
Last edited:
Right now, based on national opinion polls, it looks like Perry gets the 10th spot in the debates. I'm guessing the 9 candidates above him are hoping he hangs on. Based on history, Perry will keep the debates entertaining. I don't think he'll be a deer in the headlights this time because he has practiced a lot and isn't on serious pain meds. But he's still working with a slower chip and less RAM than most other presidential contenders, so he's as likely to say some things that will be perceived as proof of stupidity.
 
56 Bells said:
Why is no one talking about Rickie Perry?
Do you think his glasses are half full or half empty?
Click to expand...

Because he has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum for years, and he's a known commodity. We all pretty much know he's a fraud.

And the hipster glasses are more like 3/4 empty.
 
By the way, in politics, saying something perceived as stupid is just about as damaging as saying something stupid. In the 1976 presidential debate, Gerald Ford took issue with a question that assumed the Soviet Union dominated Eastern Europe. Everyone (including me as a high school senior and Jimmy Carter) "knew" that the Soviet Union dominated Eastern Europe and felt intellectually superior. Turns out Ford knew something we didn't, but he was out of office long before he got credit for it.
 
With Kasich entering, no way Aggy remains in top 10. Much like in football, big expectations before the season starts with a big flame out once the real whistle blows.
 
I'm hoping that the Donald has a lot of conservatives rethinking their support for loudmouth bomb throwing candidates and open up to a guy like kasich that can actually get something done.
 
Seattle Husker said:
An interview with Donald Trump by Anderson Cooper: http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/22/politics/donald-trump-anderson-cooper/index.html

I'm convinced Trump is simply a character whose being propped up with the intention of creating room for more far right candidates to be seen a less extreme.
Click to expand...

I've thought about that theory, but I'm not so sure. It can backfire pretty badly and pretty easily in the primary. A large part of the GOP primary base likes Trump's style. If he starts to make progress in the polls (which he clearly is), it will eventually put pressure on the other candidates to start acting more like he does to win the primary. Suppose that happens, and one of the other candidates wins after chasing Trump's voters. He'll have to spend the general election season explaining whether or not he actually thinks most Mexicans are rapists, while still saying enough bad things about them to keep Trump's old supporters motivated to show up.

Even worse, what if Trump suspects that foul play or some other type of unfairness leads to him being denied the nomination? If that happens, he'll run as an independent in the general election, which will surely doom the GOP. HRC might even carry Texas in that scenario. That's why I suspect that if there is a conspiracy going on with Trump, HRC is driving it.
 
Interesting article on how and why Rand Paul's candidacy is fizzling out. Basically, he has made too many compromises to mainstream GOP voters, which makes him the same as the other candidates while at the same time alienating the old school Ron Paul warriors. Probably a lot of truth to this.
 
For those of you that like politics and gambling.

Bush +120
Rubio +300
Trump +500
Walker +600
Paul +700
Cruz +800
Kasich +900
Huckabee +1000
Christie +1200
Carson +2000
Jindal +3000
Santorum +3500
Perry +4000
Fiorina +5000
Graham +8000

I went with Rubio and walker for a certain amount and kasich for half of that amount.
 
Bush deserves to be the favorite with his money and connections. But I'm not taking anybody at +120 this early.

FWIW, hrc is a 50/50 shot at being the next president according to the book makers.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Can Kasich be heard amidst all the noise of the rightwing blowhards? I certainly hope so. He's someone that could potentially get my vote.
Click to expand...
Just read this about recent Kasich speech... I'm going to start paying attention to this guy.

As he often does, Kasich devoted a significant portion of his remarks to those living "in the shadows" of society. He promised to help the mentally ill and drug addicts who end up in prisons and the working poor who don't have health care.

"I don't know how the Republican Party ever got itself put in the trick bag by somehow saying that if we care about people who are down and out, and we want to give them a chance to succeed, then somehow that's not conservative," Kasich said. "I think conservatism is about giving everybody a chance — demanding personal responsibility — but allowing people to pursue their God-given purpose is conservative."

He continued: "Hopefully in the course of all this, I'll begin to change some of the thinking about what it means to be a conservative."
 
chango said:
Just read this about recent Kasich speech... I'm going to start paying attention to this guy.

As he often does, Kasich devoted a significant portion of his remarks to those living "in the shadows" of society. He promised to help the mentally ill and drug addicts who end up in prisons and the working poor who don't have health care.

"I don't know how the Republican Party ever got itself put in the trick bag by somehow saying that if we care about people who are down and out, and we want to give them a chance to succeed, then somehow that's not conservative," Kasich said. "I think conservatism is about giving everybody a chance — demanding personal responsibility — but allowing people to pursue their God-given purpose is conservative."

He continued: "Hopefully in the course of all this, I'll begin to change some of the thinking about what it means to be a conservative."
Click to expand...

I'm telling you, the guy would be a great president. He's the only one in the field that I can get excited about. The problem is that his brand of politics doesn't excite the base as much as the fire breathers and **** flingers.
 
Larry T Spider said:
I'm telling you, the guy would be a great president. He's the only one in the field that I can get excited about. The problem is that his brand of politics doesn't excite the base as much as the fire breathers and **** flingers.
Click to expand...

He's actually dropping per the most recent polls. Meanwhile, Cruz gained 6-7 points, Carson gained a few, and inexplicably Trump gained a point. Either the polling services are purposely skewed to the **** flingers OR the fringe right is growing and they don't care about politicians with successful track records. That one thing is clear is that deal makers are not allowed. There is no interest in any positions other than what they hold. This is one reason that Cruz is also moving up. He and Trump both seem to think they can govern by fiat and bravado.
 
Seattle Husker said:
He's actually dropping per the most recent polls. Meanwhile, Cruz gained 6-7 points, Carson gained a few, and inexplicably Trump gained a point. Either the polling services are purposely skewed to the **** flingers OR the fringe right is growing and they don't care about politicians with successful track records. That one thing is clear is that deal makers are not allowed. There is no interest in any positions other than what they hold. This is one reason that Cruz is also moving up. He and Trump both seem to think they can govern by fiat and bravado.
Click to expand...

I don't think the polling services are skewed to the **** flingers. I think the **** flingers are getting more and more numerous in the GOP primary electorate, which is how a guy like Kasich gets framed as a moderate, which is what's hurting him in the polls. A true moderate Republican during his tenure would have been someone like Olympia Snowe. Kasich is a conservative and was part of the conservative wing of the GOP. Hell, he was Newt Gingrich's Budget Committee Chairman. Moderates didn't get appointed to that type of leadership position under Gingrich. However, he's not a **** flinger. He's a problem-solver, which is what the country really needs.

To put Kasich's record into context, he chaired the Budget Committee from January 1995 - January 2001 (didn't seek reelection in 2000), which means he had control over the budgets from 1996 - 2001 (in bold). Here are the budget deficits before, during, and after his tenure.

1990 - $221B deficit
1991 - $269B deficit
1992 - $290B deficit
1993 - $255B deficit
1994 - $203B deficit
1995 - $164B deficit
1996 - $107B deficit
1997 - $22B deficit
1998 - $69B surplus
1999 - $126B surplus
2000 - $236B surplus
2001 - $128B surplus
2002 - $158B deficit
2003 - $378B deficit
2004 - $413B deficit
2005 - $318B deficit

As Chairman, Kasich was the architect of those budgets and one of the chief negotiators with the Senate and with White House, and even before he was chairman, he offered alternative budgets that were far better than what became law. Furthermore, Kasich did this while the Pentagon was mostly having its budget increased (reversing the cuts enacted by the first two years of the Clinton Administration) and while taxes were being reduced. His fiscal management was truly a work of mastery, and I really don't see how anyone could not be impressed. However, the current GOP just doesn't give a damn about real accomplishments. It's all about who can fling more **** and who can fling it further and harder. Kasich just doesn't do a whole lot of that. All he does is balance budgets when no one thinks it's possible.

One other thing, there is a time for passionate and even combative debate. However, if you do that all the time, nobody takes you seriously, because it's obviously just a rap. If Ted Cruz gets into a frenzy about something, everybody knows that it's just Ted Cruz being Ted Cruz. Back in the early to mid '90s when I was C-SPAN junkie, I remember seeing Kasich debating the budget. He was a fierce debater and got very passionate at times. However, because he directed his passion to the policies at issue rather than people and because he didn't do it every time he opened his mouth, people took it seriously when he did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top