Political Roundtable Part VIII

closg00 · Post #1921 » by **closg00** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 7:57 pm

Agree Nate, check-out this piggyback article from a conservative site.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/03/24/the-national-enquirer-runs-story-of-multiple-ted-cruz-affairs/

dckingsfan · Post #1922 » by **dckingsfan** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:12 pm

yep, Cruz is done. National Enquirer tends to nail those kinds of stories. Think the R establishment gets behind Kasich or folds the big tent

tontoz · Post #1923 » by **tontoz** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:20 pm

This campaign has certainly been entertaining. Trump must laughing hysterically right now.

I have a very conservative/activist cousin that I will be seeing sunday. I can't wait to hear his take on this. :lol:

AFM · Post #1924 » by **AFM** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:26 pm

Word is Ted would bring his women back to his lair in his horse and carriage

dckingsfan · Post #1925 » by **dckingsfan** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:28 pm

Queue AFM - you can't stump the trump...

closg00 · Post #1926 » by **closg00** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:24 pm

Ben Carson is loving this as-well after the dirty tricks the Cruz pulled on him, he must think that Jeebus is on his side.

AFM · Post #1927 » by **AFM** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:28 pm

This is what Trump should play every time he walks into an arena

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mccN6hDlMxE[/youtube]

Post #1928 » by **pineappleheadindc** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:48 pm

closg00 wrote:Agree Nate, check-out this piggyback article from a conservative site.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/03/24/the-national-enquirer-runs-story-of-multiple-ted-cruz-affairs/

I logged into the story completely ready to dismiss the National Enquirer as a piece of garbage.

But they're not stupid. They have lawyers. The Conservative Treehouse article lays out a compelling case (plus who knew #TheThing was an actual thing) that the Enquirer may have the goods on Cruz. If true, the Republican establishment "stop Trump" movement may as well close its doors and take everyone on a fishing trip.

This election cycle is unlike anything I've ever seen in my life.

dckingsfan · Post #1929 » by **dckingsfan** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:39 am

Well - now that the Wizards are out of the playoff hunt and we don't have to bother researching college players, we can focus on Hillary and Donald :sigh:

closg00 · Post #1930 » by **closg00** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:18 am

Supposedly three additional women have come forward to rat on Cruz, this is supposedly on an update on the National Enquirer.

AFM · Post #1931 » by **AFM** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:36 am

Yo let my brutha Cruz get some pussy. We all just tryna bust nuts out here on this miserable prison planet. #BustOrDie

dckingsfan · Post #1932 » by **dckingsfan** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 1:11 pm

Ugh - Sanders wins Washington, Alaska and Hawaii - double ugh. We may be heading toward my worst nightmare. Wizards out of the playoffs keep EG and Sanders goes up against Trump. :nonono:

I think (without heavy research) Sanders needs to win 60%of the remaining delegates - so there is that...

Post #1933 » by **Ruzious** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:18 pm

dckingsfan wrote:Ugh - Sanders wins Washington, Alaska and Hawaii - double ugh. We may be heading toward my worst nightmare. Wizards out of the playoffs keep EG and Sanders goes up against Trump.

I think (without heavy research) Sanders needs to win 60%of the remaining delegates - so there is that...

I think Larry David gives Bernie Sanders a chance in New York, because New Yorkers identify with David - he's one of them - not to mention that Bernie was born and raised in Brooklyn. Of course, David sometimes falls on his face and irritates people (His monologue when he last hosted was awful). It all depends on how he does on the SNL before the primary. :wink:

TGW · Post #1934 » by **TGW** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:44 pm

dckingsfan wrote:Ugh - Sanders wins Washington, Alaska and Hawaii - double ugh. We may be heading toward my worst nightmare. Wizards out of the playoffs keep EG and Sanders goes up against Trump.

I think (without heavy research) Sanders needs to win 60%of the remaining delegates - so there is that...

Ok...what is wrong with Bernie vs. Trump other than Bernie whoopin Trump's butt in a general election?

dckingsfan · Post #1935 » by **dckingsfan** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:17 pm

TGW wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:Ugh - Sanders wins Washington, Alaska and Hawaii - double ugh. We may be heading toward my worst nightmare. Wizards out of the playoffs keep EG and Sanders goes up against Trump.

I think (without heavy research) Sanders needs to win 60%of the remaining delegates - so there is that...

Ok...what is wrong with Bernie vs. Trump other than Bernie whoopin Trump's butt in a general election?

They both have really bad economic policies that will hurt the country. Other than that - they are fine.

TGW · Post #1936 » by **TGW** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:28 pm

dckingsfan wrote:
TGW wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:Ugh - Sanders wins Washington, Alaska and Hawaii - double ugh. We may be heading toward my worst nightmare. Wizards out of the playoffs keep EG and Sanders goes up against Trump.

I think (without heavy research) Sanders needs to win 60%of the remaining delegates - so there is that...

Ok...what is wrong with Bernie vs. Trump other than Bernie whoopin Trump's butt in a general election?

They both have really bad economic policies that will hurt the country. Other than that - they are fine.

What bad economic policies does Bernie have? Do you disagree with taxing wall street speculation, or the wealthy paying more in taxes?

dobrojim · Post #1937 » by **dobrojim** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:37 pm

I find it slightly ironic that Bernie gets a lot of criticism for promising 'free stuff' from at least
some quarters but then also gets it for proposing tax increases (which would help pay for the
'free' stuff he's proposing). Which is it?

pcbothwel · Post #1938 » by **pcbothwel** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 5:09 pm

Huh?.. The criticism is that his tax hikes are bad for the economy and on top of that, they wont be enough to cover the additional entitlements.
That's not arguing both sides as much as saying "Your way of compensating for your "Promises" is not only bad, but insufficient. Therefore, you'll need to get even more drastic"

TGW · Post #1939 » by **TGW** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:17 pm

pcbothwel wrote:Huh?.. The criticism is that his tax hikes are bad for the economy and on top of that, they wont be enough to cover the additional entitlements.
That's not arguing both sides as much as saying "Your way of compensating for your "Promises" is not only bad, but insufficient. Therefore, you'll need to get even more drastic"

He's already laid out how taxes on speculation will pay for free public schooling, which is pretty cheap compared to many social programs now. He's also going to raise estate tax. Some people will cry that it's a "war on the rich" but personally I don't give a crap if the ultra wealthy get taxed more. I don't believe in reaganomics or trickle down principles, so tax them for all I care.

Post #1940 » by **nate33** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:00 pm

TGW wrote:
pcbothwel wrote:Huh?.. The criticism is that his tax hikes are bad for the economy and on top of that, they wont be enough to cover the additional entitlements.
That's not arguing both sides as much as saying "Your way of compensating for your "Promises" is not only bad, but insufficient. Therefore, you'll need to get even more drastic"

He's already laid out how taxes on speculation will pay for free public schooling, which is pretty cheap compared to many social programs now. He's also going to raise estate tax. Some people will cry that it's a "war on the rich" but personally I don't give a crap if the ultra wealthy get taxed more. I don't believe in reaganomics or trickle down principles, so tax them for all I care.

Do you believe in capital flight?