blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 06:44:07 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272476 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  The Next President of the United States
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... 308 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Next President of the United States  (Read 664703 times)
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #300 on: April 04, 2016, 09:05:32 AM »

Thing is, what he is saying about abortion sort of makes sense. If you aren't going punish a law when it's broken what's the point even having the law?
Logged
DMorgan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4449



View Profile
« Reply #301 on: April 04, 2016, 12:30:44 PM »

That there is no public appetite to punish women for having abortions seems like a great reason to scrap them altogether.

Logged

MintTrav
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3401


View Profile
« Reply #302 on: April 04, 2016, 04:29:44 PM »

Thing is, what he is saying about abortion sort of makes sense. If you aren't going punish a law when it's broken what's the point even having the law?

That is true, but he has dug his grave IMO by going there. More than any race or religion, it is political suicide to offend the sisterhood. More women vote than men and they are unforgiving if you start messing about with their bodies. It is best to state your position on this question and then stay as far away from it as possible. Now three-quarters of women polled say they dislike him. A lot of them might have liked what he had to say about economics, immigration or government, but now they ain't coming back.
Logged
Jon MW
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6191



View Profile
« Reply #303 on: April 04, 2016, 04:50:11 PM »

Thing is, what he is saying about abortion sort of makes sense. If you aren't going punish a law when it's broken what's the point even having the law?

My impression is that the law makes it illegal, in some circumstances, to provide an abortion (and using some methods).

It's not a field I know much about (so I could be wrong) - but that would mean it would never be illegal for a woman to have an abortion - and that's why they shouldn't be punished for it.
Logged

Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2011 blonde MTT League August Champion
2011 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain  - - runners up - -
5 Star HORSE Classic - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
TightEnd
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #304 on: April 04, 2016, 05:14:40 PM »

Logged

My eyes are open wide
By the way,I made it through the day
I watch the world outside
By the way, I'm leaving out today
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #305 on: April 04, 2016, 06:46:36 PM »

That there is no public appetite to punish women for having abortions seems like a great reason to scrap them altogether.

This isn't particularly about abortion, it could apply to anything.

Either have a law making something illegal and have punishments (that may or may not be enforced depending on the situation) or simply don't have a law. A law without potential punishments is a waste of everybodies time.
Logged
neeko
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1762


View Profile WWW
« Reply #306 on: April 04, 2016, 07:02:33 PM »

Suicide used to be illegal in the uk - anyone that failed could be prosecuted.

It was abandoned in 1961.
Logged

There is no problem so bad that a politician cant make it worse.

http://www.dec.org.uk
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #307 on: April 04, 2016, 07:25:43 PM »

Suicide used to be illegal in the uk - anyone that failed could be prosecuted.

It was abandoned in 1961.

Exactly don't have the law then....
Logged
TightEnd
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #308 on: April 04, 2016, 08:21:50 PM »

John/anyone else

been asked the following on tft

"In view of what has been written on the US politics thread is there any mileage in backing Paul Ryan at 50-1 for the next president. If he does get the nomination we should be able to green out without going all the way to the election, which he is unlikely to win it would seem."

any views?
Logged

My eyes are open wide
By the way,I made it through the day
I watch the world outside
By the way, I'm leaving out today
MintTrav
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3401


View Profile
« Reply #309 on: April 04, 2016, 10:07:26 PM »

John/anyone else

been asked the following on tft

"In view of what has been written on the US politics thread is there any mileage in backing Paul Ryan at 50-1 for the next president. If he does get the nomination we should be able to green out without going all the way to the election, which he is unlikely to win it would seem."

any views?

50/1? It definitely should be less than that. The party's whole plan is to use Cruz to keep Trump out, but then to replace him with another candidate they like better. Ryan is their strong favourite:

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/04/02/concerns-paul-ryan-emerging-ted-cruz-created-contested-convention-nominee-dominate-wisconsin/

There are a couple of difficulties with the plan.

One is Cruz' masterful organisational ability. We first saw it in Iowa, but his groundwork has been incredible throughout. He is currently working hard on getting his delegates onto the rules committee for the Convention. The rules are set every four years for that year's Convention and this committee will have the power to decide who is eligible to stand. If Cruz and Trump get enough of their guys on they will try to enforce the Eight States rule, preventing Kasich or anyone else from even standing. You're going to hear a lot more about Rule 40 before we're much older; 40 (b) to be precise. It's shaping up to be an almighty dust-up, the likes of which we've never seen in our lifetime, and should be fantastic to follow. We have a lot to be grateful for to the cartoon characters who have run this time and put the wind up the political aristocracy. And that's before the Convention even starts, where we could have multiple rounds of voting with different rules each round. Anyway, the make-up of its membership is crucial and, as I said, Cruz is on the case.

The next difficulty is that Ryan keeps saying he isn't interested. More than that, he volunteers the view that if you want to be President, you should run for it, whereas he could just pretend he's not interested without the extra emphasis if he is just pretending:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/04/04/paul-ryan-president-2016/82609122/

Finally, who says he wouldn't win? The Republicans are in bad shape, partly due to the demographic of their support, but partly because the cream has somehow sunk to the bottom and the crap has risen to the top through this process. Clinton is a flawed candidate, but her current potential opponents are much worse. A strong popular candidate like Ryan could do much better than the current options. He is well-regarded by most and while he may not be well-known here, he is in the US. He has a high profile as Speaker of the House and, remember, he was Romney's running mate for VP last time.

Despite the caveats, if I was a betting type, I would jump on the 50/1.
Logged
JohnCharver
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1249


View Profile
« Reply #310 on: April 04, 2016, 11:18:23 PM »

John/anyone else

been asked the following on tft

"In view of what has been written on the US politics thread is there any mileage in backing Paul Ryan at 50-1 for the next president. If he does get the nomination we should be able to green out without going all the way to the election, which he is unlikely to win it would seem."

any views?

50/1? It definitely should be less than that. The party's whole plan is to use Cruz to keep Trump out, but then to replace him with another candidate they like better. Ryan is their strong favourite:

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/04/02/concerns-paul-ryan-emerging-ted-cruz-created-contested-convention-nominee-dominate-wisconsin/

There are a couple of difficulties with the plan.

One is Cruz' masterful organisational ability. We first saw it in Iowa, but his groundwork has been incredible throughout. He is currently working hard on getting his delegates onto the rules committee for the Convention. The rules are set every four years for that year's Convention and this committee will have the power to decide who is eligible to stand. If Cruz and Trump get enough of their guys on they will try to enforce the Eight States rule, preventing Kasich or anyone else from even standing. You're going to hear a lot more about Rule 40 before we're much older; 40 (b) to be precise. It's shaping up to be an almighty dust-up, the likes of which we've never seen in our lifetime, and should be fantastic to follow. We have a lot to be grateful for to the cartoon characters who have run this time and put the wind up the political aristocracy. And that's before the Convention even starts, where we could have multiple rounds of voting with different rules each round. Anyway, the make-up of its membership is crucial and, as I said, Cruz is on the case.

The next difficulty is that Ryan keeps saying he isn't interested. More than that, he volunteers the view that if you want to be President, you should run for it, whereas he could just pretend he's not interested without the extra emphasis if he is just pretending:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/04/04/paul-ryan-president-2016/82609122/

Finally, who says he wouldn't win? The Republicans are in bad shape, partly due to the demographic of their support, but partly because the cream has somehow sunk to the bottom and the crap has risen to the top through this process. Clinton is a flawed candidate, but her current potential opponents are much worse. A strong popular candidate like Ryan could do much better than the current options. He is well-regarded by most and while he may not be well-known here, he is in the US. He has a high profile as Speaker of the House and, remember, he was Romney's running mate for VP last time.

Despite the caveats, if I was a betting type, I would jump on the 50/1.

Followed your stuff here and its very interesting, cheers so dont take this the wrong way but wtf is the whole point of all that has gone before if someone who hasnt run or someone whos been beaten or even thrashed gets the nomination? Everybody is already looking on thinking the americans are lunatics for trump even being considered, but then to go and rob him is not only undemocratic, but it also endears him to people who hate him/ think hes a joke.

I was expecting this all to fall apart at the final hurdle, a bit like the national front in france a while back, when people will come out and make sure this buffoon doesnt get in, but to see him robbed of a nomination hes fairly contested is ridiculous?

Our system is stupid, their system is utterly pointless.
Logged
MintTrav
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3401


View Profile
« Reply #311 on: April 05, 2016, 12:19:01 AM »

Followed your stuff here and its very interesting, cheers so dont take this the wrong way but wtf is the whole point of all that has gone before if someone who hasnt run or someone whos been beaten or even thrashed gets the nomination? Everybody is already looking on thinking the americans are lunatics for trump even being considered, but then to go and rob him is not only undemocratic, but it also endears him to people who hate him/ think hes a joke.

I was expecting this all to fall apart at the final hurdle, a bit like the national front in france a while back, when people will come out and make sure this buffoon doesnt get in, but to see him robbed of a nomination hes fairly contested is ridiculous?

Our system is stupid, their system is utterly pointless.

Totally agree. The candidates have spent two years of their careers on the race, plus God knows how long planning and working their way to the starting point. But it's not just them. They are surrounded by all kinds of staff, plus they have untold numbers of volunteers (Cruz literally has thousands). There are all the media people, the analysts,  the suppliers, and on and on. Every event requires security, transport, food, communications and everything else you can think of. I couldn't begin to imagine how many people have spent their time on this, including me. We can work out the cost, at least to the candidates, as they publish it. To the end of Feb, donations to Republican candidates and SuperPacs totalled $599.4m. I have no idea what the cost is of TV companies and all the other organizations caught up in it. And for what? They are nowhere. They don't have a candidate. They are heading for an out-of-control Convention, with little idea of how it will turn out. Whoever gets the nomination, most of their own party will be opposed to them and probably hoping they lose, if not intending to actively work against them. All the time, effort and money has been pointless, as you say. The whole system is a shambles. I wish it was on every year.
Logged
Rexas
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1963


View Profile
« Reply #312 on: April 05, 2016, 12:50:36 AM »

Have to say, Trav et al, that I've thoroughly enjoyed the coverage in this thread. Really top stuff, thanks a lot for posting Smiley
Logged

humour is very much encouraged, however theres humour and theres not.
I disrepectfully agree with Matt Smiley
MintTrav
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3401


View Profile
« Reply #313 on: April 05, 2016, 12:33:31 PM »

Trump has had a lot of popular support. What he has been really short of is big-name political endorsements. There are various celebrities and second-line politicians, but the only 'big beasts' supporting him are Chris Christie, Ben Carson and Sarah Palin, none of whom are ideal partners. Carson and Christie have given interviews where it is clear that they are not really that keen on Trump, but just see him as the best option available, ie preferable to Cruz. Christie is finished anyhow, so it doesn't much matter what he says.

Carson's support hasn't been worth much, as he keeps undermining it with strange lukewarm statements:

“He has some major defects, there’s no question about it, just like the rest of us, but I think he is willing to listen to other people..........Are there better people? Probably. But one of the things we have to do is broaden our pool from which we select our leaders".

In another interview he said "Is there another scenario that I would have preferred? Yes, but that scenario isn't available." Interviewer: "With one of the other candidates you mean?" Carson: "Yeah."

So that leaves Palin, who is always good value. I love this woman - so glad she has taken a role this year. This morning, she hit Facebook with some stirring support that is guaranteed to bring out the voters for her guy, especially with the accompanying happy snap:
 Click to see full-size image.
Logged
JohnCharver
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1249


View Profile
« Reply #314 on: April 05, 2016, 06:18:18 PM »

Have to say, Trav et al, that I've thoroughly enjoyed the coverage in this thread. Really top stuff, thanks a lot for posting Smiley

This, its like WWE for grownups, and its great having a sane person to tell us what the lunatics are doing.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... 308 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.141 seconds with 21 queries.