The Humour Club discussion
General
>
Politically Incorrect
Mod
The Democratic party's decision to back Hillary was made before she even announced her candidacy. Apparently, it was HER TURN, DAMMIT!, or something like that. And since Her Highness is entitled to the throne, THIS TIME, I think they were stunned that anyone dared challenge her. Hence, party head, Debbie Wasserman Schultz's scheduling of the debates at 3:14 am on Sundays - all the better to ensure that NOBODY sees there might be someone out there who's better than Her Nibs.
We've been sitting back laughing as the Republicans fall apart at the seams, when the same damn thing has been happening, granted - in a much more civilized, gentile, no-comparing-penis-sizes manner - in our own party.
We'd better get our act together, or we'll all be watching President Trump Presents "Who Wants to Be the Next Supreme Court Justice?" in the spring of '17.
Mod
New York
Delegates at stake for the Democrats: 291
Delegates at stake for the Republicans: 95
Pennsylvania
Delegates at stake for the Democrats: 189
Delegates at stake for the Republicans: 71
Indiana
Not a key state for Democrats.
Delegates at stake for the Republicans: 57
California (AKA - Ye Olde Big Prize)
Delegates at stake for the Democrats: 475
Delegates at stake for the Republicans: 172
New Jersey
Not a key state for Republicans.
Delegates at stake for the Democrats: 126
SPECIAL NOTE: New Jersey is not a key state for Republicans, however their governor has still "Trumped" up some Republican support, an obviously weighty decision.
Mod
Actually, I don't mind baggage (within certain limits). Candidates without any baggage have never taken a stand on anything or withstood severe public criticism (pressure).
The 'no baggage candidate' is somewhat of an unknown, untested, and possibly gutless quantity.
Of course, if the candidate shoots his mother on the 6 o'clock news... Well, that's more of a trunk than a bag really.
Mod
Jersey should be quite interesting. Since their massively unpopular governor has turned himself into Trump's
Mod
I suppose it's possible to avoid swallowing by cutting your own throat...
Mod
"The rules for selecting delegates to party nomination conventions in the United States are far more complex, inconsistent and irrational than the Electoral College could ever hope to be."
"All of this means that the Republican National Convention, which opens in Cleveland on July 18, may potentially see a clash between two forms of democratic legitimacy: the populist direct-democratic form championed by Trump, and the less majoritarian institutional one represented by the Republican Party (and, indeed, many institutions of American political life)."
from:
Why Donald Trump Is Fast Losing the Delegate Game
--A pretty good explanation of the 'Delegate Dance.'
Apparently, Donald either is unaware or doesn't care that the deck is stacked, which will likely shaft his campaign no matter how much popular support he manages to gain. His campaign may be a bluff, but the bet was called a long time ago.
Between gerrymandering, each state making their own rules, delegate BINGO, bound vs. free status of delegates, convention backrooms, and the veto power of the electoral college... One man, one vote is nothing more than a nice, comfortable fantasy used to soothe the savage beast (popular anger).
However, if you've actually read the writings of our Founding Fathers, you can be confident that all is as they intended. That is, the country will be run by wealthy, educated, male property owners.
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”
― Winston S. Churchill
Winston was apparently correct, however this still leaves the average voter in a bit of a schizophrenic spot. On the one very small hand, no rational person wants to see the narcissistic Trump in the Oval Office. On the other, if Trump is screwed out of the GOP nomination by obviously foul means...should we protest? Do we really care?
This brings up even more questions:
-Would Cruz be a legitimate candidate if not supported by GOP popular vote?
-If ignored by the party's power elite, could the current very popular anti-establishment backlash possibly be a final straw for the GOP? Will it splinter them into future irrelevance?
-Can the country survive WITHOUT the GOP's rightwing wackadoodles obstructing progress and gridlocking congress?
Excuse me a moment. After contemplating that last thought, I need a cigarette.
Mod
Mod
Sort of agree on the "private organization" stance, Joel. Since a party is a group of people theoretically organized toward the same political goals, it certainly can be viewed as a private organization, not dissimilar to a charity with a defined goal. However, considering that the rules for these organizations were established by 50 separate state governments (and an odd number of territories) that theoretically must cooperate in national elections, there is definitely a public sphere tinge to these organizations.
Also, 50+ separate sets of rules, each claiming sovereignty, hardly bespeaks "organization."
I think the best that we can say is that it's a messy system.
As to the civics classes no longer being required, I agree that's a big mistake. More than 50% of our population can't name the three branches of government, and few of them even know what the Bill of Rights is. It's a sad state when our recent immigrants know our government better than our citizens.
Mod
I think it's been proven that 50% of our presidential candidates can't name the three branches of government.
Mod
LOL! So true!
A Republican friend has been diagnosed with Electile dysfunction. He can't get excited about voting for any of the GOP presidential contenders. (I wish I could claim this as original, but Anonymous beat me to it.)
Mod
Not state governments. State party organizations. Again, private, not public. The only thing state governments do is decide whether or not to subsidize the cost of conducting the primaries. Arizona's legislature, for instance, decided to cease doing so after this last one.
Mod
I had to think about this one, Joel. Yes, I also think the popular vote is a bit of a fantasy, but it's not really that cut and dry anymore. Like everything else in elections, it's a complex mixture of tradition and chicanery.
The original Constitution delineated the rules for Electors, which were liberalized by the Twelfth Amendment, and further delineated by various state laws. National and local party influence is also a factor.
Here's a pretty good explanation from the National Archives:
"There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties.
"The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties’ nominees....No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.
"Today, it is rare for Electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party’s candidate....Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of Electors have voted as pledged."
Ergo, while the Constitution does not recognize a popular vote, following the popular vote is mandated by many states' laws and party traditions.
But as the Bush-Gore fiasco showed, it's not 100%. Electors can vote against pledge, and there are also unbound electors in the system. One must also consider a touch of the unscrupulous, such as the Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, who purged voter roles and forced\fudged\finagled a recount of votes in order to award Florida's electoral votes to Bush, even though Gore had won the state's popular vote according to many counts using methods considered more honest. (That election is still controversial, but was settled by the US Supreme Court.) LESSON LEARNED: You can still end up with
Is there a popular vote for president? Yes and no.
Arguable competing views -- sure sounds like politics to me!
Mod
From the US National Archives article:
These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties.
I certainly can't say that I'm familiar with the election laws in all 50 states, but if the National Archives is correct, some Electors are bound by state law. State law is passed by legislatures. Ergo, public not private.
No one (certainly, including moi) fully understands our system of elections.
Like I said before, Joel, the system is a mess!
Mod
Electile dysfunction... That's hilarious, Gary!
Mod
Mod
Mod
I just pictured them twerking. Now I think my lunch is on its way back up.
Mod
New York, not the grand prize (CA) but definitely a delegate heavy state, has voted for the home team.
Republicans
-Trump won big, capturing 60% of the popular vote and 89 of the 95 available GOP delegates. There are a few delegates unreported yet, but there's no question that Donald has swamped the competition.
Still, to capture the nomination he has to play the Delegate Dance a little smarter, and the Wall Street Journal is recommending that he take some real polls and stop pulling numbers out of his ass.
Problem: No one is sure if Donald knows how to go ass-less.
-Kasich—remember him?—came in second with 25% of the popular vote, but an anemic 3 captured delegates. For some odd reason, Kasich's campaign will not die even though he has only won a single primary, his home state of Ohio. He also has the somewhat unsubtle problem—description borrowed from Alice Roosevelt Longworth—of "Looking like he was weaned on a pickle." Seriously, would it kill him to smile without it looking like a gas pain...or even better, show a little grace and quit.
-Cruz's pitiful showing, 14% of the popular vote and 0—I say, ZERO—captured delegates shows an Achilles Heel that no one in the GOP wants to admit. That is, the country is increasingly leaning away from the religious right, and Ted hasn't. While Cruz is no intellectual slouch and he can play politics with the best of them, there's only so many delegates that can be manipulated into his camp. At some point, he has to show that he can appeal to more than the FOX News demographic.
I don't think Cruz really understands (Or cares!) about this problem. His hardcore religious right stance fails to recognize that the fastest growing "religion" in the United States is No Religion, commonly referred to as 'Non-affiliated' and currently over 22% of the population. That's 71+ MILLION AMERICANS who are not interested in a theocracy. Deal with it, Ted!
Democrats
-Hillary figuratively tap danced on Bernie's windpipe in her beloved New York, capturing 58% of the popular vote and 135 delegates. She's not just the Dem frontrunner, she's looking more and more like an unbeatable frontrunner. And the rhetoric coming out of her camp is not shy about mentioning all her laurels. The media is also leaning towards coloring her nomination as inevitable.
On the plus side, there's no question that Hillary is qualified for the job. In fact, better qualified than any other candidate in either party. Additionally, the baggage that the GOP hopes will sink her is NOT getting any traction at all with Democratic voters. Compared to most GOP senators and congressmen's abysmal performance (or obstruction\gridlock thereof), a few emails don't mean squat. Ergo, voters are not the least bit embarrassed to have developed a taste for pants suits and sensible shoes.
-Bernie does hail from the Northeast, but it didn't buy him much favor in New York. He captured 42% of the vote and 104 delegates.
Yes, there were some problems with the voting machines, but as yet the only ones who believe this led to an anti-Bernie bias are members of Bernie's camp. That tune is coming off more as a bit of sour grapes, and the problems would not have changed the outcome even if 100% were settled in Bernie's favor.
The real problem for Sanders is that his rhetoric is becoming strained. New York voters are over 30% college grads. Facts and figures don't scare them. Granted, younger voters tend to buy into the Sanders dream, but more and more people are asking Bernie to back up his wish list with a comprehensive 'How To'.
Conclusion
Is it fair at this point for Trump and Hillary to assume they are the winners of
Primary-o-rama? Is it fair for the media to make this assumption?
Probably not, but unless the competition ups their game significantly...
Mod
Mod
LOL! Nice one, Joel!
There's also a problem with the reverse. I understand Jesus would hang out with prostitutes and lepers, but politicians???? Likely, he'd turn down the VP offer.
Mod
LOL! Nice one, Joel!
There's also a problem with the reverse..."
WWJD? Run, not walk, to the nearest exit from the RNC.
Mod
From the New York Times article:
Long Primary Carries Costs for Hillary Clinton: Money and Time
Quote from a Clinton supporter:
“Bernie Sanders has the real possibility of being the modern-day Ralph Nader. All he’s doing now is hurting Hillary.”
Interesting viewpoint!
There's only so many million and millions and millions of dollars to be blown on winning the Oval Office, and money spent winning your party's nomination can't be reused to defeat the other party's nominee in the general election.
(Note to self: Look into inventing reusable money.)
Time, the other obvious factor, is also better spent on winning the general election than in trying to win the votes of all three of Wyoming's registered voters away from someone who trails by over 700 delegates and uses Ben Gay as an aphrodisiac.
(Sorry, Bernie. It was just too easy! ;-) )
Keep in mind, we're vying for the job of 'Most Powerful Person in the World.' Even if you're chances of winning are remote beyond description, can anyone blame you for exploiting each and every hope of winning....especially when you're not spending your own money, and you might get the chance to nuke the guy who called You're Having My Baby a love song!
When should an "also ran" candidate pull out of the race for the good of the party?
At what point is the party's National Convention a formality?
Is there a rational cutoff point?
Even if the candidates aren't rational, shouldn’t their campaign organizations tend to be?
Or, is it delusional to expect a presidential election to have some rationality?
Mod
Tuesday's primary results in the Northeast gave some interesting insights into the race. With just a few laps to go, some are already calling the race...and they may be right.
Republicans
-Trump added 106 (some still unreported) delegates and now has 950 of the 1,237 delegates necessary to win. While he's done well with the poor and high school grads, his 5-state Grand Slam was in the most highly educated corridor in the country. He also crossed all income levels. All-in-all a pretty surprising result for a candidate who can't get his own children to vote for him.
So, what the hell is going on?
There are several possibilities:
1. The anti-establishment anger runs deeper than anticipated. Voters would rather risk electing a businessman\reality TV star\author\billionaire, who would gladly plaster his name on 'Trump's Ebola' if he thought it would sell, than continue strolling blindly down Plutocracy Road.
2. Cruz and Kasich are simply not likable candidates, which sounds so much better than 'right-wing wack-a-doodles,' or the more conventional, 'putzes.' Trump really doesn't have any strong competition.
3. The GOP's reliance on the religious right is coming back to bite them. Considering recent history: Legalized marijuana, gay marriage, the repeated defeat of intelligent design, transitional fossils that are RIGHT THERE ON THE DAMN SHELF, etc....the country's backlash against the bible-thumpers has rarely been more consistent. Apparently, most of the GOP does not want another religious conservative nominee.
4. Trump actually did make a deal with the devil. (Or, just bought him out.)
Whatever the case, Trump is now dismissing his rivals for the nomination: "I consider myself the presumptive nominee," he said, adding later: "As far as I'm concerned, this thing is over."
-Cruz added one delegate (RI). No one expected him to do well in the Northeast, and he exceeded expectations—his performance genuinely sucked, not even besting Kasich except in Pennsylvania. Cruz is now claiming that the upcoming Indiana primary is "more favorable terrain." Then again, so is Oz.
In a side deal, Cruz has been strategizing with Kasich to slow Trump. However, he apparently forgot to inform the voters of his plan. Cruz's hope of a brokered convention is fading rapidly, but if all else fails, he can always try embracing reality.
-Kasich added 5 delegates, and has won only one state. However, it's still rumored that he's running for president.
Democrats
-Hillary won big (194 delegates) everywhere but Rhode Island. She now has 2,141 of the 2,382 delegates needed to win. If she performs even modestly in upcoming primaries, the nomination is hers. While she's not as brazen as Trump in claiming the race is over, Hillary has held out an olive branch to Sanders supporters, "Whether you support Senator Sanders or you support me, there is much more that unites us than divides us."
She's also addressing Trump's belittling remarks more aggressively. It seems she's done taking crap from Donald. When the gloves come off, Trump will likely find that an ex-Secretary of State who faced down leaders and despots all around the world has the capacity to slap ten like him before breakfast.
Won't this be interesting.
-Sanders picked up 129 delegates for a total of 1,321, still more than 1000 delegates away from the nomination. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid told reporters Bernie does not have a "realistic path to winning the nomination." It appears that's true, but with some caveats.
Sanders appeals strongly to independents (Gallup Poll: 43% of voters), or as Trump calls them "losers." Many independents cannot vote in the primaries and caucuses in their states. His appeal also tends to peak among groups known for weak primary voting performance, such as the youth vote. So, the standard Democratic run to the convention does not really work in his favor. Many voters who would support him in a general election are not currently counted.
Sanders also loses out on Superdelegates (39 to Hillary's 519). He failed to convert the party elite, yet the story might have been different if he'd had just a bit stronger showing in the primaries, or if more Democratic politicians stopped dismissing him as a wacky old goat. Sometimes, NOT wearing red and marching in a straight line is a good thing, even in Washington.
Meanwhile, Trump is encouraging Sanders to run as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. However, Bernie isn't that stupid (hopefully). Splitting the Democrats' vote in the general election would be better for Trump than Sanders. So much for narcissistic Trump's altruism.
Bernie's run a great race, and he's not quitting yet, but Hillary's lead simply appears too strong to overcome. A Sanders win does indeed seem unrealistic.
At the very least, he's introduced some great ideas that the Democrats should certainly consider, such as sending kids to college without bankrupting them and their families, and proving that it's possible for a man his age to tweet about more than denture adhesive.
Conclusion
Is the race over? Have we now firmly established that it's going to be Hillary and Donald in the general election?
Possibly.
There are more primaries to come, but no one forecasts any surprises. In addition, the upcoming conventions may just be a formality. Still, the GOP convention would be worth watching just to see the look on Cruz's face when he finds out Trump cancelled his invitation.
Mod
And, what's with the increasing number of Republicans bowing out of the convention? Is it from fear of Trump's promised Thug Patrol Riotfest, or that the flung mud may ruin their clothes? I was hoping for a WWE Smackdown, but it may just turn out to be Trump's Coronation Gala.
Mod
Yet, Cruz has not a chance to win.
Still, one and all should take a gander,
'Cause this boy sure knows how to pander.
Republican Cruz, hoping to revive struggling campaign, taps Fiorina as No. 2
Mod
ERGO...
A refreshing refresher on political INcorrectness:
Jay wrote: "I think I need a little break from the election. Not to be too graphic, but pictures of Ted Cruz are starting to trigger my gag reflex.ERGO...
A refreshing refresher on political INcorrectness:..."
Love that!
Mod
Mod
Why limit it to UK members? Many Americans are interested in our European neighbors and regularly read up on European current events.
My thoughts on Brexit? Not quite as sweet on the guitar as George Harrison, but a better singing voice than Sting.
Mod
CNN poll: Americans agree Clinton and Trump headed for a faceoff
"According to a new CNN/ORC poll out Monday, 84% of voters nationwide think Donald Trump will lead the Republican ticket in November, while 85% say the same about Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton."
Naturally, they reported few details on how the poll was conducted, or any possible biasing factors. Such as asking questions like:
Do you think the GOP nomination will go to Donald Trump or one of the other jackasses?
On the GOP side, frankly any poll that discounts Cruz and Kasich is reflecting both the actual delegate counts and the fact that the 'also ran' campaigns are about as exciting as Sominex with a melatonin chaser.
The Dems on the other hand are not as clear cut. Is it possible that Bernie can force a contested convention? Will his supporters come out of the woodwork at last, or will he find a superdelegate formula that works... Stranger things have happened in a hanging chad view of American politics.
However, it makes one wonder...
What is the significance of these possibly "too early" polls? Are the voters or the media deciding on our 2016 nominees????
Maybe we should take our own poll.
Mod
Why limit it to UK members? Many Americans are interested in our European neighbors and regularly read up on European current events.
My thou..."
I'm interested in what the people living through the campaign have to say. Personally, I say giddyup. Or is that tally-ho?
Mod
CNN poll: Americans agree Clinton and Trump headed for a faceoff
"According to a new CNN/ORC poll out Monday, 84% of voters nation..."
It's been said that Bernie's poor showings were affected by the fact that independents could not vote in many states, but that hardly matters now. Hillary still has an FBI investigation looming over her head, and the weird-looking Trey Gowdy will NOT let Benghazi go away. I'm sure one or both of these scandals will come to a head sometime before November. Perhaps The Bern will get his chance after all.
The Cruzich monster died a predictable death before destroying any cities, or winning any more delegates. Ted just can't stop being cringe-worthy.
I fully expect that it will be Hillary vs. Trump. The debates will be interesting, as Trump will need to answer real questions and not just recite talking points. Then again, nothing he says will change the minds of his fans. Hillary, however, is gonna have to work hard to sway the Bernie base.
If she can't, Trump may indeed win.
Gulp.
Mod
LOL! "Cringe-worthy!" I love it!
RE: Hillary, however, is gonna have to work hard to sway the Bernie base. If she can't, Trump may indeed win.
While Bernie is currently in 'fierce competition' mode, he's a very reasonable man in most respects. If he's lost the nomination, I'm pretty sure he'll throw his support (and hopefully, most of his supporters) behind Hillary.
The alternative is just too horrifying!
Mod
Everything gets shaken up by Indiana.
Really? Indiana?
I have nothing against the good folks of Indiana, but they're certainly not the most populous, diverse, or even representative state in the union. How did they cause such a stir?
Republicans
-If Trump's ego was HYUUUUGE before, it's now bloody monstrous! He added 51 delegates and his opponents won ZERO! The facts are in: no one can catch him before he secures the nomination.
Barring political skullduggery, Trump is the GOP nominee.
Yes, Trump—conceited, arrogant, offensive, narcissistic, abusive, abrasive, misogynistic and poorly informed on the issues and challenges the nation's chief executive must handle daily—that Trump will be the GOP nominee.
VERY SERIOUSLY, I wonder if Republican voters are aware that, should this disaster take office, they CANNOT then tell him, "You're fired" when Mexico decides it won't pay for the wall.
If rational people decide to vote in the general election, the Republicans may suffer a defeat worse than Mondale (D – 1984). How will Trump "deal" his way out of that one?
-Cruz's zero-delegate Indiana performance caused him to quit!
Ted pulled the plug on his campaign blaming everything except his performance, his platform, and Trump (not mentioned at all). The truth is that Cruz misread our entire pot-smoking, gay-marriage-approving, racially-mixed, increasingly-secular country.
With even National Geographic reporting on the rapid secularization of the country , it seems patently obvious that a hard-right religious conservative was not the best candidate choice for 2016.
Diversity—it means 'voters who think you're an ass,' Ted.
Lastly, Cruz is young enough to run again in 2020. Like bad kielbasa, we may be in for a repeat.
-Kasich is maintaining his consistent last place performance, but he refuses to quit. On the upside, he's rumored to have the most incredibly optimistic tweets, #delusional.
Democrats
-Hillary lost overall in Indiana, but added 37 delegates. She's now less than 200 delegates away from securing the nomination, which at this point makes her literally unstoppable.
She's already moved her focus from defeating Sanders in future primaries to defeating Trump in the general election, and she's consolidating her significant advantages. Trump must deal with a severely fractured GOP, while the Dems are certainly more cohesive, and some say, more enthusiastic. Women and minority voters will certainly support Hillary, and she's likely to get support from the majority of Sanders voters when he is finally defeated or withdraws.
On the downside, the Republicans are going to hammer her on the emails and the Benghazi attack. However, there are no new revelations there, and frankly, most voters don't seem to care.
Maybe, it's just time for pantyhose to hang in the White House shower.
-Sanders won Indiana, picking up 43 delegates, but does it mean anything? Can he force a contested convention on the party?
It's looking less and less likely.
In the end, Bernie is going to have a good bit of party influence, but not the nomination. The only questions are when will he bow out, and will he do it gracefully. It will be an interesting resolution to watch.
Conclusion
The primary race is over. Unless some radical surprise springs up at the last minute, we are looking at Trump vs. Clinton in the general election. Could we possibly have asked for a more ironic outcome than to have a documented misogynist run against a woman?
America, you're beautiful!
Mod
Everything gets shaken up by Indiana.
Really? Indiana?
I have nothing against the good folks of Indiana, but they're certainly not the most populous, diverse, or even representat..."
Cruz = bad kielbasa is a new one, but oh, so appropriate. He'll hide for a while, cry, lick his wounds, have some chunky soup, and be all ready to roll again in 2020. I expect him to start campaigning again in 2017.
I am truly looking forward to the Hillary/Trump debates, as Trump has serious trouble conversing with a woman he doesn't want to bang. Should be interesting.
The Republicans REALLY SHOULD run their own candidate. True, he/she can't win, but it would make a statement, and take some voters away from Trump.
I'm curious what our resident Republican has to say about all this. Thoughts, Joel?
Mod
Many people have been waiting for the other shoe to drop...and here it is:
Kasich’s quiet withdrawal clears field
"Mr. Kasich did not say why he quit the race or shed light in his 16-minute speech on whether he’ll support Mr. Trump, whose proposals he has denounced as “disturbing.”
Certainly, this is not surprising to anyone who has watched John Kasich's struggling campaign, and the result of this move is also certainly obvious:
--Donald stands alone.--
Trump does not have just a clear field to the Republican nomination, Trump IS the field.
However, you have to give Kasich credit for his persistence. He's collected quite a collection of 'last place finishes.'
A Few Other Random Thoughts
• Not a single one of the GOP's career politicians generated enough support in the 2016 primaries to be a serious contender for the nomination? Does the Republican Party leadership have enough backbone to face the lessons learned from this debacle?
• The Tea Party and the religious right have obviously been rejected on a massive scale. Are Republican "values" outdated?
• HOW can the Republicans alter their platform to become inclusive of our increasingly diverse population?
• Will the GOP survive this rejection of their mainstream candidates, or is the political landscape now open to the rise of a new party to replace the GOP? There's certainly enough money around to support a replacement party. Could 2020 be the year when the race for the Oval Office will be the Democrats vs. A New Party?
Obviously, there's no easy answers to such questions. Still, when pondering a political landscape without hard-right Republicans...
Damn, I need a cigarette.
Mod
Is it possible the political cartoonists have watched a movie or two?
Mod
Love that last one!
Mod
I guess green ham is similar to bad kielbasa.
Hey guysAs an interested outside observer (in the UK) I found Cruz quitting to be quite a shock; I thought he would stick to the end regardless, just to try to make things trickier for Trump.
What's your take on this? Is it that the rest of the GOP hate him so much he wouldn't stand any chance if it came to a contested convention? Or has he just cut his losses with the hope of coming back in four years?
Mod
Many people have been waiting for the other shoe to drop...and here it is:
Kasich’s quiet withdrawal clears
"Mr. Kasich did not say why he quit the race or she..."
Those "Republican values" are only as old as Karl Rove's electoral strategy. They were never more than a one-shot strategy. That anybody still believes any ideology will substitute for management ability is an indication, to me, at least, that they have no idea whatsoever what the President's job description looks like.
Mod
Gotta agree, Joel. Not only that, I don't think many people understand the difficulty of the job. The stress of the job ages presidents rapidly, and no matter what they do, someone will be upset. Not to mention the odd national or international crisis.
Ability however is not something the average voter thinks much about when choosing a candidate. Sad.
Mod
The truth is, Ted is a tender soul and he just could no longer stand being compared to a horse's ass.
-OR-
There's no way to tell what the final straw was for Cruz.
-Did he have enough money coming in to be competitive with Trump?
-Did he realize that he'd burnt too many bridges in Washington for a contested convention to work in his favor?
-Did he think continuing to lose badly would perhaps damage a bid in 2020?
We have about as much chance of finding out ALL the details of his decision as we have of landing astronauts on Mars by the end of the week.
The Humour Club
Books mentioned in this topic
Unfinished Business (other topics)The Office (other topics)
Pacific Crucible: War at Sea in the Pacific, 1941–1942 (other topics)
Pacific Crucible: War at Sea in the Pacific, 1941–1942 (other topics)
The Glass Castle (other topics)
More...
Does Bernie Sanders need to win New York for the media to take him seriously again?
It's true, the media has taken a dismissive attitude towards Bernie because he's as far left as Cruz is right.
Then again, there may be other issues:
-Dem Superdelegates are almost exclusively backing Hillary, so it seems the power elite in the party has already made its decision, and it wears makeup, pants suits and sturdy shoes.
--Okay, so maybe that doesn't completely exclude Bernie.
-Bernie looks (and sometimes sounds) like the Jewish grandfather who won't quit telling you about the Holocaust at every holiday, bris and bar mitzvah. Even though he has some great ideas, his presentation lacks sizzle.
--Be honest, even when Bernie is excited and angry about something, does it remind you of a movie or a funeral home named, 'Die Hard.'
-While Kennedy set a goal of going to the moon and people bought in wholeheartedly, Bernie is not setting goals. He's saying, 'I AM going to do this.' which generates a lot of skepticism.
--First, he doesn't say how (No facts and figures).
--Second, the Republicans in congress have repeatedly shown that they'd rather bend over naked at a gay rights parade than work with a Democrat in the White House.
SO, keeping in mind that Bernie is a seated US Senator (not a political nobody like Trump), is the media making the decision that he's more 'putz' than 'candidate'?