Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Official 2016 GOP thread: Is it really going to be Donald Trump?? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
timschochet
Footballguy
He's both right and wrong. His brother did help create ISIS by disbanding the Iraqi Army. And OBAMA helped create ISIS by leaving too soon without trying to enforce improvements. And the biggest culprits are the Iraqis themselves, because despite all of our mistakes and wrongdoings, we gave them the extraordinary chance to turn themselves into a much better nation, and they were unwilling/unable to do so.
Not every problem fits into a partisan lens where it's either Bush's fault or Obama's fault. There's plenty of fault to go around. The only important question that Jeb and Hillary and every other candidate needs to answer is: now what? No point looking backwards; it's done.
Not every problem fits into a partisan lens where it's either Bush's fault or Obama's fault. There's plenty of fault to go around. The only important question that Jeb and Hillary and every other candidate needs to answer is: now what? No point looking backwards; it's done.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Yaknow, I thought twice about making that comment, but the reality is that Hillary is the race, if you don't talk about how each and every GOP candidate compares vs Hillary now then you will later. In case you didn't look at the link, Bush is in an auditorium, surrounded by voters taking live questions. I'm just saying compare vs what Hillary would say in a similar setting (and let's face it, she won't, maybe ever). If anyone has double standards, its people who are setting a far lower bar for her running for president. Hillary refused time and again to say she regretted her vote - and the fact she spoke influentially and passionately on the floor for the war - and she used the troops as a reason:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/06/why-hillary-clinton-didnt-apologize-for-iraq-vote-during-2008-campaign/
You asked and I answered. Obviously this is about Bush and he raises so many issues in his answer so it's much more than that, but I think the title of the HuffPo piece...
...should be considered in that context.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I'm not going to get into the merits of the question or answer or the facts, but I think this highlights how much Bush is compromised on the issue. He cannot separate himself from the issue emotionally or personally. In every situation he has to personally defend his brother in addition to just discussing the issue at hand.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Chadstroma
Footballguy
That chick sounds like the girl that everyone avoids (regardless of political leanings) so as to not get into a conversation with while in a big group of people. And if she somehow corners you, your mind races to figure out an excuse to run away.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Chadstroma
Footballguy
No, any time anyone uses the term "pedantic" in an encounter like that they automatically have lost solely based on being unbearable. Just an automatic go straight to jail and DO NOT collect $200 card.
Last edited by a moderator:
joffer
Footballguy
Eephus
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/joe-scarborough-jeb-bush-iraq?utm_content=buffered0b4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Scarborough Stunned By Jeb Bush on Iraq: 'This Is A Mental Thing' (VIDEO)
How bad was this week for likely presidential contender and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ®? Bad enough that MSNBC host Joe Scarborough on Thursday said he might have gotten him all wrong.
"I've been talking about how smart Jeb is and how competent Jeb is the last three days have just been really bad for Jeb Bush," Scarborough said on "Morning Joe."
Scarborough was in disbelief over Bush's repeated blunders this week in trying to answer whether he would have invaded Iraq like his brother George W. Bush, knowing what he knows now about the results of the war.
The MSNBC host, who supported the war in 2003, asked contributor and Bloomberg's Mark Halperin to pose the Iraq question to him.
"No, it was a horrible idea, as bad an idea as sticking your face in a blender, what's your next question?" Scarborough said, to laughter from the panel.
Scarborough then turned to Nicole Wallace, former communications director to President George W. Bush.
"What's wrong with Jeb Bush?" he asked. "This a mental thing, isn't it?"
"I don't work for Jeb, I don't talk to Jeb," she answered.
Still, Wallace ended up echoing one of Bush's many responses this week, that he stumbled over the Iraq questions due to his respect for the troops.
"I mean, he got on the phone with people whose husbands and fathers had died and so I think it's very difficult to say, you know, it wasn't worth it," she said.
Watch the clip: (found at link).
Scarborough Stunned By Jeb Bush on Iraq: 'This Is A Mental Thing' (VIDEO)
How bad was this week for likely presidential contender and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ®? Bad enough that MSNBC host Joe Scarborough on Thursday said he might have gotten him all wrong.
"I've been talking about how smart Jeb is and how competent Jeb is the last three days have just been really bad for Jeb Bush," Scarborough said on "Morning Joe."
Scarborough was in disbelief over Bush's repeated blunders this week in trying to answer whether he would have invaded Iraq like his brother George W. Bush, knowing what he knows now about the results of the war.
The MSNBC host, who supported the war in 2003, asked contributor and Bloomberg's Mark Halperin to pose the Iraq question to him.
"No, it was a horrible idea, as bad an idea as sticking your face in a blender, what's your next question?" Scarborough said, to laughter from the panel.
Scarborough then turned to Nicole Wallace, former communications director to President George W. Bush.
"What's wrong with Jeb Bush?" he asked. "This a mental thing, isn't it?"
"I don't work for Jeb, I don't talk to Jeb," she answered.
Still, Wallace ended up echoing one of Bush's many responses this week, that he stumbled over the Iraq questions due to his respect for the troops.
"I mean, he got on the phone with people whose husbands and fathers had died and so I think it's very difficult to say, you know, it wasn't worth it," she said.
Watch the clip: (found at link).
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
My impression: he was not prepared for what has to be the No. 1 issue he would have to be prepped on. Getting past the stances (plural) being unprepared for this issue is just terrible.
squistion
Footballguy
Perhaps not yet ready for prime time, and as the link below mentions he had years to prepare for the answer. Looks like he finally got it right.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/fourth-times-the-charm
Fourth times the charm?
By Steve Benen
"If you knew in 2003 what we know now, would you have launched the war in Iraq?" Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ® gave three very different answers to that question in three days, none of which made sense.
Today, as msnbcs Kasie Hunt reported, was Answer #4.
After days of equivocation, Jeb Bush on Thursday declared: "Knowing what we know now, what would we have done, I would not have engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq."
"Thats not to say that the world isnt safer because Saddam Hussein is gone. The world is safer," Bush said. He went on to say it also didnt mean the sacrifices of troops who died in Iraq, and their families, were not wasted, he explained his difficulty answering the question as concern for military service members who fought in the war.
This should, in theory, end the excruciating political test that the Republican presidential hopeful was failing miserably. Indeed, if Jeb Bush had answered the question this way with Fox News Megyn Kelly, there would have been no controversy.
He knew the question was coming, and he had literally years to prepare a good answer, but the Florida Republican flubbed this badly anyway.
For those keeping track at home:
On Monday, "If you knew in 2003 what we know now, would you have launched the war in Iraq?" Bush said he would have launched the war anyway.
On Tuesday: "If you knew in 2003 what we know now, would you have launched the war in Iraq?" Bush said he doesnt know what he would have done.
On Wednesday: "If you knew in 2003 what we know now, would you have launched the war in Iraq?" Bush said he doesnt even want to answer the question at all, because a response would be a disservice to U.S. troops.
And on Thursday: "If you knew in 2003 what we know now, would you have launched the war in Iraq?" Bush said he wouldnt have launched the war.
His clarification needed a clarification, which needed further clarifying.
The headline on Gail Collins new New York Times column continues to stand out: Wow, Jeb Bush is awful.
rockaction
Footballguy
I'm no Jeb defender, but using Gail Collins as your citation towards authority shouldn't just be a logical error, you should make it a double with an orange peel.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I can't quite even get to the issue (another thread) or his variegations on it, and after getting past the very issue of how compromised he is on this because of his inherent and understandable connection to his dad and brother, who both invaded Iraq, I'm trying to think of what could possibly go wrong with a president who can't quite understand a question posed to him, after 1, 2, 3 times, on the subject of war. Not to mention Campaign Day 1 when he first discussed going over his policy positions to run for president his team probably handed him a memo with Agenda Item No. 1 being this very subject, how is he fumbling around for his crib sheet?
Last edited by a moderator:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
I am not sure you can say we invaded Iraq in Dessert Storm. We did a left hook that did 'techinically' involve Iraqi territory but the objective was to liberate Kuwait and trap Iraqi forces. The cease fire was called after it turned into a turkey shoot and before our forces turned north to Baghdad. Further, not too many people say that we should not have gone to war in the First Gulf War.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I really don't want to debate the issue here, but George Sr. did go into Iraq IIRC, that's an invasion. And the inspection protocol set up in Iraq War I was the reason for Iraq War II. I wouldn't count it really but let's face it, two Bushes, two Iraq Wars.
John Kerry is an example of a guy who voted against Iraq I but for Iraq II. Of course he is our SOS now.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
So who is going to be in the ABC debate? Only announced candidates? That would mean no Walker, no Bush, no Christie...
Chadstroma
Footballguy
It would be kind of odd to have a someone debate at one of those debates that was not running (or at least who had announced they were).
timschochet
Footballguy
IIRC correctly, back in 2012 there was an early GOP debate that Romney and a few others didn't show up for, and that allowed Herman Cain to become prominent for the first time with his "999" plan. So maybe we'll see something like that again.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
Isn't the debate in August? I assume all these guys will have declared by then.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I was wondering what Tim meant -
. Exactly I think the field will be settled by then.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Ok. So, your position is that we invaded Iraq in Dessert Storm and that we should not have? Please- present your case.
timschochet
Footballguy
OK thx. Sorry I got confused by something I read in the Stephanolous articles about a debate being held next Friday.
timschochet
Footballguy
Jeb how now changed his answer 3 times:
1. I would have invaded.
2. I don't know; its a dumb hypothetical and insulting to our troops.
3. I would not have invaded, but we are safer now because my brother did.
1. I would have invaded.
2. I don't know; its a dumb hypothetical and insulting to our troops.
3. I would not have invaded, but we are safer now because my brother did.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Politically, it's senseless. His number one job as a candidate was distancing himself from his brother and the biggest issue on George's bio, the Iraq War.
Now Jeb has placed it front and center in his own campaign.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
The worst of it was saying something to the effect that there's no space between him and W on this issue.
squistion
Footballguy
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/17/marco-rubio-iraq-_n_7300400.html
Marco Rubio Struggles To Explain Whether He Thinks Invading Iraq Was A 'Mistake'
(video at link)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) struggled to reconcile past statements he has made about the 2003 invasion of Iraq with an answer on whether he thought the decision to invade was a mistake during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday."
Last week, Rubio was asked whether he would have still authorized a war, knowing what is known now about Iraq and its lack of weapons of mass destruction. He unequivocally said no.
"Not only would I not have been in favor of it, President [George W.] Bush would not have been in favor of it, and he said so," Rubio said following a foreign policy speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in New York.
On Sunday, however, Rubio rejected the rationale behind host Chris Wallace's question about whether the senator and 2016 presidential contender had flip-flopped on the issue, since he had said in March that it was not a mistake to invade the country. Wallace and Rubio spoke over each other as they attempted to sort out the semantics of the question.
"Those are two different questions; it was not a mistake," Rubio said. "The question was whether it was a mistake, and my answer was it was not a mistake. I still say it was not a mistake, because the president was presented with intelligence that said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction ... [bush] made the right decision based on what he knew at that time. We learned subsequently that information was wrong. My answer is, at the time, it appears the intelligence was wrong."
Marco Rubio Struggles To Explain Whether He Thinks Invading Iraq Was A 'Mistake'
(video at link)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) struggled to reconcile past statements he has made about the 2003 invasion of Iraq with an answer on whether he thought the decision to invade was a mistake during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday."
Last week, Rubio was asked whether he would have still authorized a war, knowing what is known now about Iraq and its lack of weapons of mass destruction. He unequivocally said no.
"Not only would I not have been in favor of it, President [George W.] Bush would not have been in favor of it, and he said so," Rubio said following a foreign policy speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in New York.
On Sunday, however, Rubio rejected the rationale behind host Chris Wallace's question about whether the senator and 2016 presidential contender had flip-flopped on the issue, since he had said in March that it was not a mistake to invade the country. Wallace and Rubio spoke over each other as they attempted to sort out the semantics of the question.
"Those are two different questions; it was not a mistake," Rubio said. "The question was whether it was a mistake, and my answer was it was not a mistake. I still say it was not a mistake, because the president was presented with intelligence that said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction ... [bush] made the right decision based on what he knew at that time. We learned subsequently that information was wrong. My answer is, at the time, it appears the intelligence was wrong."
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
Jeb: Christians should be able to refuse service to gays.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/17/jeb-bush-gay-weddings_n_7301728.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Accidentally the smartest thing he's done all week.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/17/jeb-bush-gay-weddings_n_7301728.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Accidentally the smartest thing he's done all week.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Kucinich also getting in now.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ohio-gov-john-kasich-virtually-run-president-sources/story?id=31105452
And Pataki will be getting in too:
http://www.examiner.com/article/former-ny-governor-george-pataki-to-enter-2016-gop-presidential-race-on-may-28
So is Graham:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/lindsey-graham-2016-presidential-announcement-june-1-118047.html#ixzz3aUhizIQW
If you count Walker and Bush, say also Santorum and Christie, I think one thing that's interesting about the GOP field is not the much discussed diversity, but the geographical diversity:
Florida x2
Wisconsin
Ohio
Kentucky
California
Arkansas
Texas
NY
PA
NJ
SC
Michigan
The Demos so far:
NY
VT
MD
RI
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Lindsay Graham: Iraq was NOT a mistake.
You gotta give the guy some credit. Every other candidate is running away from this war as fast as they can, but not Lindsay. He voted for it at the time and he sticking with it.
You gotta give the guy some credit. Every other candidate is running away from this war as fast as they can, but not Lindsay. He voted for it at the time and he sticking with it.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Hey I agree. Hillary's answer was straight on too today. Of course they are both like the golfers who have already seen two guys putt on their line already, and Hillary went through the same sumersauts in 2008, but pretty much the way to handle the question is apparent now.
timschochet
Footballguy
Graham deserves more credit, even though I disagree with him.
As much as I like Hillary, going against the grain (or public opinion) is not exactly something she does often, or well.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
You get zero credit for refusing to acknowledge obvious mistakes. Graham is a bafoon.
timschochet
Footballguy
The latest Iowa polling has Walker slightly ahead of Huckabee and Cruz, with Bush and Rubio way down the list.
I don't believe that Bush or Rubio (or Christie) has any chance of winning Iowa. They "win" Iowa so long as Walker does not win Iowa. As I see it, Walker remains the one conservative choice in the race who could challenge one of the two or three establishment candidates. But Walker, in order to do this, has to win Iowa and unify the conservative vote.
If Huckabee or Cruz win Iowa, then the rest of the country's Republicans will panic and select one of the establishment guys, whoever wins New Hampshire or Florida- Bush or Rubio, with Christie an outside shot. (That's how McCain won in 2008). If Walker wins, it's a whole new ballgame- conservatives will be energized because they have a real candidate for the first time in years, and we'll see a repeat of 1964.
I don't believe that Bush or Rubio (or Christie) has any chance of winning Iowa. They "win" Iowa so long as Walker does not win Iowa. As I see it, Walker remains the one conservative choice in the race who could challenge one of the two or three establishment candidates. But Walker, in order to do this, has to win Iowa and unify the conservative vote.
If Huckabee or Cruz win Iowa, then the rest of the country's Republicans will panic and select one of the establishment guys, whoever wins New Hampshire or Florida- Bush or Rubio, with Christie an outside shot. (That's how McCain won in 2008). If Walker wins, it's a whole new ballgame- conservatives will be energized because they have a real candidate for the first time in years, and we'll see a repeat of 1964.
Gawain
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Sorry no it was on the radio this morning. Something like Walker at 24%, Cruz and Huckabee tied at 22, everyone else considerably lower.
rockaction
Footballguy
Rand Paul is Goldwater. Nobody else, though Walker is a conservative candidate many people could get behind.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
GOP wing candidates since 1950: Goldwater
Demo wing candidates since 1950: Stevenson x2 (Ike sucked all the air out the middle), McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Obama.
If anything Clinton's DLC was an attempted destruction of the left wing because supposedly they had killed their electoral chances. Funny how quickly the base forgets.
I'm not sure JFK was to the left or right of HHH or LBJ but he sure as heck tried to out-anticommunist them.
Gawain
Footballguy
RCP does a pretty good job of updating polls and their last Iowa Republican result is from May 6.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/#
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html
I can't find anything online about a new poll. If Walker, Cruz and Huckabee are where you state they are, no one's ahead. All would be within each others margin of error and would be tied.
timschochet
Footballguy
Fox News has announced that the first debate will have 10, not 8 candidates- whoever is leading in the polls at that time. CNN will do the same except they will feature a separate debate for the "second tier" candidates.
As of now, per national polling, the 10 candidates would be:
Bush
Rubio
Walker
Cruz
Huckabee
Paul
Carson
Santorum
Christie
Perry
Fiorina, Jindal, Graham, Kasich, Pataki, Bolton et al would all be in the minor league debate...
As of now, per national polling, the 10 candidates would be:
Bush
Rubio
Walker
Cruz
Huckabee
Paul
Carson
Santorum
Christie
Perry
Fiorina, Jindal, Graham, Kasich, Pataki, Bolton et al would all be in the minor league debate...
timschochet
Footballguy
Even 10 guys on stage is a lot- too much really to form any good impression.
squistion
Footballguy
For some reason this does not surprise me:
http://www.eonline.com/news/659339/mick-huckabee-defends-josh-duggar-amid-molestation-allegations-good-people-make-mistakes
Mike Huckabee Defends Josh Duggar Amid Molestation Allegations: "Good People Make Mistakes"
Well, here's one person who's speaking out in support of Josh Duggar amid the shocking molestation allegations.
The Duggar family is making headlines this week because of a recently unearthed Arkansas police report which states that Josh was interviewed back in 2006 in response to an accusation that he had sexually abused underage girls in 2002 and 2003. [...]
Now, conservative politician and Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee is voicing his support for the 19 Kids and Counting star.
"Janet and I want to affirm our support for the Duggar family. Josh's actions when he was an underage teen are as he described them himself, 'inexcusable,' but that doesn't mean 'unforgivable.' He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities," the 59-year-old Republican wrote on his Facebook page Friday. "No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story. Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things. The reason that the law protects disclosure of many actions on the part of a minor is that the society has traditionally understood something that today's blood-thirsty media does not understand - that being a minor means that one's judgement [sic] is not mature. No one needs to defend Josh's actions as a teenager, but the fact that he confessed his sins to those he harmed, sought help, and has gone forward to live a responsible and circumspect life as an adult is testament to his family's authenticity and humility."
Huckabee continued, "Those who have enjoyed revealing this long ago sins in order to discredit the Duggar family have actually revealed their own insensitive bloodthirst, for there was no consideration of the fact that the victims wanted this to be left in the past and ultimately a judge had the information on file destroyednot to protect Josh, but the innocent victims. Janet and I love Jim Bob and Michelle and their entire family. They are no more perfect a family than any family, but their Christian witness is not marred in our eyes because following Christ is not a declaration of our perfection, but of HIS perfection. It is precisely because we are all sinners that we need His grace and His forgiveness. We have been blessed to receive God's love and we would do no less than to extend our love and support for our friends. In fact, it is such times as this, when real friends show up and stand up. Today, Janet and I want to show up and stand up for our friends. Let others run from them. We will run to them with our support."
http://www.eonline.com/news/659339/mick-huckabee-defends-josh-duggar-amid-molestation-allegations-good-people-make-mistakes
Mike Huckabee Defends Josh Duggar Amid Molestation Allegations: "Good People Make Mistakes"
Well, here's one person who's speaking out in support of Josh Duggar amid the shocking molestation allegations.
The Duggar family is making headlines this week because of a recently unearthed Arkansas police report which states that Josh was interviewed back in 2006 in response to an accusation that he had sexually abused underage girls in 2002 and 2003. [...]
Now, conservative politician and Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee is voicing his support for the 19 Kids and Counting star.
"Janet and I want to affirm our support for the Duggar family. Josh's actions when he was an underage teen are as he described them himself, 'inexcusable,' but that doesn't mean 'unforgivable.' He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities," the 59-year-old Republican wrote on his Facebook page Friday. "No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story. Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things. The reason that the law protects disclosure of many actions on the part of a minor is that the society has traditionally understood something that today's blood-thirsty media does not understand - that being a minor means that one's judgement [sic] is not mature. No one needs to defend Josh's actions as a teenager, but the fact that he confessed his sins to those he harmed, sought help, and has gone forward to live a responsible and circumspect life as an adult is testament to his family's authenticity and humility."
Huckabee continued, "Those who have enjoyed revealing this long ago sins in order to discredit the Duggar family have actually revealed their own insensitive bloodthirst, for there was no consideration of the fact that the victims wanted this to be left in the past and ultimately a judge had the information on file destroyednot to protect Josh, but the innocent victims. Janet and I love Jim Bob and Michelle and their entire family. They are no more perfect a family than any family, but their Christian witness is not marred in our eyes because following Christ is not a declaration of our perfection, but of HIS perfection. It is precisely because we are all sinners that we need His grace and His forgiveness. We have been blessed to receive God's love and we would do no less than to extend our love and support for our friends. In fact, it is such times as this, when real friends show up and stand up. Today, Janet and I want to show up and stand up for our friends. Let others run from them. We will run to them with our support."
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
Why? Seems bizarre to have so many people running. Looks more like a group of opportunists trying to promote their own personal books/radio/celebrity than lead the party and promote conservatism.
Similar threads
