Thread: 2016 Democratic US Presidential Candidates

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Ted Cruz
Paul Ryan
Rick Perry
Bobby Jindal

Cruz is a nitwit who thinks he can shut down the ebil gubmint (which pays his salary) and blame Obama for it:

Sen. Ted Cruz Supports Government Shut Down, Blaming Obama (Audio)

Daddy Cruz might be a bit off on the whole "Ted's gifted above any man" and "God has destined Ted for greatness" thing.

Paul Ryan is an idiot, even repubs hate his ridiculous budget ideas and yet he is touted as a math wonk!

GOP Transportation Bill Fail - Business Insider

Rick Perry? Oops!

Bobby Jindal? Yeah, his name isn't Bobby it is Piyush, let's see how that plays out on the national stage and with the teabaggers. Plus he stepped in against all advice from qualified people to battle an oil spill and this was his result:



He's also promoting creationism, admits to having participated in an exorcism and railed against scientific monitoring of volcanoes. Somebody dealing with natural disaster should surely be concerned about volcanoes right?

In closing, let us not forget Jindal's fucking hilarious response to the SOTU speech a few years ago:

Bobby Jindal Channels Kenneth the Page in GOP Response

Real strong field you are posting there!


Bonus: Condi is a lesbian, she'd probably get more votes from dems than today's repubs and her field of expertise is a country that doesn't exist any more. And this:

RICE: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States."

Probably won't help much.
Raw Data: Full Hearing Transcript | Fox News

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Real strong field you are posting there!

Bonus: Condi is a lesbian, she'd probably get more votes from dems than today's repubs and her field of expertise is a country that doesn't exist any more.

Any one of them has accomplished more in their respective short terms in Public Service than HRC.

btw, HRC is strongly suspected of being a rug merchant herself - nothing wrong with mind you. Look where it's gotten Janet Napolitano.

^
Would you vote for a creationist Booners? Serious question.

Originally Posted by pickel

^
Would you vote for a creationist Booners? Serious question.

The separation between church & state in the US is pretty strong.

I'd vote for a Mormon, a Creationist, a Roman Catholic, or Jew if that individual was qualified.

A creationist believes in the bible "literally". That would include the Armageddon part. Would you really want one of them with their hands on the football?

^
They may say one thing to get elected, but believe another, as politicians are known to do. I'd like to see more atheists in power personally.

Originally Posted by barbaro

But many creationists are now saying that they do not take Genesis literally.

If they don't take Genesis literally then they aren't creationists, it's kind of the definition.

It would be interesting to read something about the mental gymnastics creationists use to explain why they think they can disregard Genesis.

Originally Posted by robuzo

It is likely true that some among the "intelligent design" crowd don't take Genesis literally but still see the hand o' God at work in evolution or something.

Maybe, but the thing they all ignore is that evolution does not concern itself with abiogenesis only with speciation. It's even in the title of Darwin's book.

Therefore their whole "intelligent design" claim falls flat on its face unless they can explain why God saw fit to create bubonic plague, smallpox etc. When questions like that are put to them they always fall back onto "the Lord works in mysterious ways" type arguments and if they want to go with that then they have zero justification for believing in itelligent design just because of a book written circa 2K years ago and rewritten, edited and re-interpreted countless times since says so.

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by robuzo

It is likely true that some among the "intelligent design" crowd don't take Genesis literally but still see the hand o' God at work in evolution or something.

Maybe, but the thing they all ignore is that evolution does not concern itself with abiogenesis only with speciation. It's even in the title of Darwin's book.

Therefore their whole "intelligent design" claim falls flat on its face unless they can explain why God saw fit to create bubonic plague, smallpox etc.

Might not too big a stretch for a God who wipes out cities, wipes out His entire creation in a flood, commands His People to kill all members of a rival tribe but for the virgins (), etc. Not the most pleasant of creation myths, really.

Piyush Jindal? Holy shit, isn't he Indian? They believe the world is resting on the back of an elephant.

Originally Posted by Rainfall

They believe the world is resting on the back of an elephant.

So do I, well four heffalumps actually.


I am a big Terry Pratchett fan!

Originally Posted by pickel

^
They may say one thing to get elected, but believe another, as politicians are known to do. I'd like to see more atheists in power personally.

Yeah, no doubt about that. Many politicians pretend to be christian because of the polling numbers (unfortunately). Some politicians start attending church before a run like Gingrich did, and the papers publish it. And Bill Clinton walking out of church with the "Holy Bible" in his hand for the money shot for all to see in the magazines and newspapers. Hitler wrote that a politician and even a dictator had to have the church in some form on their side.

As Richard Dawins noted in the "God Delusion," based on statistics there are definitely atheists and agnostics in the House and the Senate. Some Presidents for sure. Jefferson bashed organized religion and christianity. His writings would feel like they were written today to the reader.

There has been a Black President, and a woman is viable, so it is too bad that an Atheist would have no chance according to the polls.

Hopefully someday.

Originally Posted by S Landreth

The poll posed four hypothetical 2016 match-ups with Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee running against Republicans Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz.

Christie comes closest in national preference, trailing Clinton by just 4 points, 43% to 39%. Bush is behind Clinton by 10 points, 47% to 37%, and Rubio trails by 11 points, 47% to 36%. Cruz is behind Clinton by 16 points, 48% to 32%. Cruz is also the least well-known of the potential GOP field and may in fact be ineligible to run due to his birth in Canada.

If Cruz was not born on a military base (or something like the Panama Canal like McCain) then he is not elibile, period.

Unless there is some exception because his mother or father were working in Canada or on holiday when he was born - but I do not think there is an exception.

Why was he born in Canada? I am off to google.

Originally Posted by barbaro

If Cruz was not born on a military base (or something like the Panama Canal like McCain) then he is not elibile, period.

What are you basing that on?

Everything I've read says that what actually defines "natural born citizen" has never really been decided.

Some argue that being born to one US parent who meets the requirements grants "natural born" status even if the individual was born on the moon and some argue that somebody must be born within the US (or a military base abroad etc as you noted) to be "natural born".

In either situation Obama would be eligible. The loons who claim he was born in Kenya and therefore disqualified would then have to agree that Cruz is also disqualified.

Cruz would meet the first definition of natural born but could run into trouble if the "within the US" bit is accepted as a requirement for natural born status.

In the hypothetical situation that Cruz runs, wins the nomination and a case against his eligibility gets to SCOTUS it is hard to imagine the current supremes would rule him ineligible. I suppose it is possible Roberts might side with the minority which would make for spectacular theatre as the howls to impeach him from the GOP and the teabaggers would be deafening!

Wanna have some fun!

Games | The Hillary Project

Heh..."We didn’t see the liberal media bemoaning this “Slap Palin” game when it came out!

They only care when it’s the candidate they support for president."

Press "Hillary Speaks" and then...

Wow! It is looking better and better all the time for Hillary. If she can take Georgia it is already game over.

If former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton runs for president in 2016, the state of Georgia could be within her reach, according to a new poll.

Clinton topped two of the GOP’s potential candidates in hypothetical matchups, according to a survey Democratic firm Public Policy Polling released Thursday.

The presumptive Democratic nominee led Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul by 5 points, 48 percent to 43 percent and Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan by 3 points, 47 percent to 44 percent, among Georgia voters. Clinton was tied with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at 45 percent and lagged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie by 2 points, 44 percent to 42 percent.

Mitt Romney won the state of Georgia in the 2012 presidential election with 53 percent of the vote, compared with 45 percent for President Barack Obama.

The poll included 520 Georgia voters from Aug. 2-5 and has a margin of error of 4.3 percentage points.


Read more: Georgia 2016 poll: Hillary Clinton in play - James Arkin - POLITICO.com

^
Snubbles...you still don't get it, do you?

Another manufactured candidate like Obama - HRC isn't worth a warm cup of spit.

What has she accomplished?

Zero. Nada. Nothing and is simply another empty suit with nothing behind her but her old man...

^ You just love to tell people that they "dont get it" dont you? Well let me tell you something pal. I see it crystal clear. HRC will be the next president of the United States. In November of 2016 should we be prepared for a repeat of your two month flounce pouting session of 2012?

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ You just love to tell people that they "dont get it" dont you? Well let me tell you something pal. I see it crystal clear. HRC will be the next president of the United States. In November of 2016 should we be prepared for a repeat of your two month flounce pouting session of 2012?

Heh...still can't come up with a single accomplishment of hers can you?

Sad...

^ Ok dippy I will play.

She has served two terms as a US Senator and ran for the presidential office.

Twice, Hillary Clinton has been listed in the list of the 100 most influential American lawyers.

No other First ladies held a post-graduate degree before Hillary Rodham Clinton.

And accomplishments as Sec of State.

Far more qualified then that dipshit isolationist Rand Paul.

Heh...she's a loser and y'all know it. Only reason she's even considered is there's basically nobody else with the manufactured name she's got. She's been lyin' her ass off from the start of her 'career' - to wit:

FLASHBACK: HILLARY CLINTON FIRED FROM WATERGATE INVESTIGATION FOR