Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:27 pm
Will start at Power Forward for a Dave coached team...DRiccio21 wrote:only at Center!!shel311 wrote:My take from all of this...Dave hates Spud Webb!!!
Spoiler!
Page 5 of 252
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:27 pm
Who the hell is that?shel311 wrote:I did an I Side With during lunch, I got Gary Johnson.
Great, never heard of him.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:31 pm
NIIIIICE!shel311 wrote:I did an I Side With during lunch, I got Gary Johnson.
Great, never heard of him.
that's a libertarian
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:37 pm
is that good? A quick Google search, I like the sound of it:DRiccio21 wrote: NIIIIICE!
that's a libertarian
Libertarianism is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association, and the primacy of individual judgment.
It's never too late Gary, you got this!!!
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:39 pm
You're on Team Trendon
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:41 pm
Is that who he supported?dakshdar wrote:You're on Team Trendon
Not sure if good or bad.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:42 pm
I Side With.........
Hilary Clinton :\
Hilary Clinton :\
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:04 pm
shel311 wrote:is that good? A quick Google search, I like the sound of it:DRiccio21 wrote: NIIIIICE!
that's a libertarian
Libertarianism is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association, and the primacy of individual judgment.
It's never too late Gary, you got this!!!
if i was forced to choose a party, i'd consider myself libertarian ... loosely defined as socially moderate and fiscally conservative.
but i hate the idea of just broadly classifying myself with any party or title.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:34 pm
Not a bad time to do one of those "who to choose" updates:
94% - Trump
87% - Rubio
87% - Carson
84% - Cruz
70% - Johnson
63% - Bloomberg
61% - Kasich
31% - Clinton
25% - Stein
20% - Sanders
My usual disconnect from Libertarians comes from my stance on gun control (I do think we need tougher screening for purchases, too many loopholes); NSA involvement (I do believe we need some level of data gathering); and foreign military involvement (I believe there are situations where we should take action). Libertarians tend to have very hard stances on those 3 issues.
94% - Trump
87% - Rubio
87% - Carson
84% - Cruz
70% - Johnson
63% - Bloomberg
61% - Kasich
31% - Clinton
25% - Stein
20% - Sanders
My usual disconnect from Libertarians comes from my stance on gun control (I do think we need tougher screening for purchases, too many loopholes); NSA involvement (I do believe we need some level of data gathering); and foreign military involvement (I believe there are situations where we should take action). Libertarians tend to have very hard stances on those 3 issues.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 5:14 pm
yeah those things never work well for me. I am liberal on a lot of social issues and for equality but am very pro government in things like border security and NSA. Against foreign military involvement in Syria. Side with Republicans on most education issues.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 6:04 pm
He aint lying!
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:13 pm
Unless something has changed recently i'm pretty sure the USPS gets no federal money.GeorgesGoons wrote:I have never voted. I always had an internal struggle with voting for my boss.Cnasty wrote:Which brings me to another discussion point after my american flag wearing underwear rant above.
When you guys vote, what do you vote for or how? Is it strictly party lines? Do you actually believe the candidate you are voting for will meet the needs of you as a citizen? Just curious what goes through your personal thought process. I don't need to know who you are voting for.
This year I will vote based on who I think will keep America afloat and not sink her more into debt with social programs that have proven they don't work. We need a serious look at welfare reform. We need Americans to want to be better and not receive handouts. We need a better education system that is handled at the local level, but with bare minimum federal standards. We need to cut all the excess and wasteful programs the government loses money on year in and year out, I'm looking at you USPS. We need the enemy to fear us and our overwhelming reach into 3rd world countries. We need to worry about our problems here before worrying about other nations problems. Bring jobs back to America and exercise a large tax on companies outsourcing jobs that can be done here. A flat tax and a consumer tax. Fire everyone in suits at the VA. Term limits on supreme court justices, congress and senate These are things that is important to me.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:22 pm
I've agreed with just about everything you've said in this thread including views on social issues. This statement is not true though. The USPS does not use government money like you seem to think. The USPS funds itself by sales and services. The only reason they show in the red is because they are forced to pre fund their retirement fund every year. No other government entity is required to do this. None. Then congress steals any overages that was pre-funded. That is billions of dollars.GeorgesGoons wrote:We need to cut all the excess and wasteful programs the government loses money on year in and year out, I'm looking at you USPS.
But yeah. You are right. They need to cut spending on wasteful programs.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:43 pm
I stand corrected. I thought they were funded by the government. Thanks for the heads up.OracleHCR wrote:I've agreed with just about everything you've said in this thread including views on social issues. This statement is not true though. The USPS does not use government money like you seem to think. The USPS funds itself by sales and services. The only reason they show in the red is because they are forced to pre fund their retirement fund every year. No other government entity is required to do this. None. Then congress steals any overages that was pre-funded. That is billions of dollars.GeorgesGoons wrote:We need to cut all the excess and wasteful programs the government loses money on year in and year out, I'm looking at you USPS.
But yeah. You are right. They need to cut spending on wasteful programs.
But, all other stances stand true for me
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:06 am
http://fortune.com/2015/03/27/us-postal-service/
not that it really makes a difference but for the discussion sake.
not that it really makes a difference but for the discussion sake.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:42 am
Good read!DRiccio21 wrote:http://fortune.com/2015/03/27/us-postal-service/
not that it really makes a difference but for the discussion sake.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:44 am
Did anyone watch the debate tonight? What were your thoughts?
I need to wait till it comes out on YouTube to watch it so I can comment on it.
I did see the very end when they asked if they would support Trump if he was the nominee. All said yes. That alone says that the GOP is starting to come to grips that they will have to back Trump.
I need to wait till it comes out on YouTube to watch it so I can comment on it.
I did see the very end when they asked if they would support Trump if he was the nominee. All said yes. That alone says that the GOP is starting to come to grips that they will have to back Trump.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:54 am
They asked him what he would do if troops refused an order that violated the Geneva convention or other similar rules and his response was simply that they wouldn't refuse him 
There was also a claim that he had made numerous donations to Hilarys campaign (assuming past years) but don't have the story on that
There was also a claim that he had made numerous donations to Hilarys campaign (assuming past years) but don't have the story on that
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:04 am
Pretty damning of the other candidates to challenge and attempt to disprove everything he says and then support him if it came to it. I guess that's just politics but man it just seems so backwardGeorgesGoons wrote:Did anyone watch the debate tonight? What were your thoughts?
I need to wait till it comes out on YouTube to watch it so I can comment on it.
I did see the very end when they asked if they would support Trump if he was the nominee. All said yes. That alone says that the GOP is starting to come to grips that they will have to back Trump.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:06 am
GeorgesGoons wrote:Did anyone watch the debate tonight? What were your thoughts?
I need to wait till it comes out on YouTube to watch it so I can comment on it.
I did see the very end when they asked if they would support Trump if he was the nominee. All said yes. That alone says that the GOP is starting to come to grips that they will have to back Trump.
That was a shitshow. Trump and Rubio came off like complete jackasses, while Cruz was only a slight jackass. Kasich probably won the debate based on the sheer fact that he didn't engage at all... but beyond that, he actually hit some really homers on some of his points. I'm not a big Kasich fan (even living in Ohio), but credit where it's due tonight.