Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Marco Rubio 2016 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jamny
- Start date
Chadstroma
Footballguy
I will cast a vote. If it is Soviet Sanders vs Trump then I will likely vote Libertarian though I am very much not a libertarian. Or hopefully a rational third party candidate would come along. Hell, as much as I do not like Bloomberg- I would throw my vote in his support.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Democrat Socialist Sanders is too long and doesn't have the same ring to it. Get over yourself.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
If Rubio is too far behind- I don't see how Kasich will be able to catch up. One thing is for sure- the one is hurting the other by still being in the race.
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
The elderly in Florida or elsewhere aren't going to like the young whipper- snapper beating up on the old man. Nobody shows up to the polls more than the elderly....If anything, last nights debate may cause Rubio lose numbers...
Aerial Assault
Footballguy
at this idiot spelling choker 'chauker' in his stupid insult speech. Trump spelled it right and this total moron screwed that up.
I think Trump spelled it right twice and wrong once. But yeah, Robotio is a true moron.
RnR
Footballguy
Ehh... you know Trump deleted the Tweets, right?
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
17seconds
root of all aliai
When Trump was saying Rubio looked like he had such a sweating meltdown he "just got out of a swimming pool", was he referring to the exchange with Christie a few weeks ago? I rewatched that and it's not that bad. It wasn't good for Rubio, but it doesn't stand out as one of the great meltdowns. Complete exaggeration by Trump, creating his own history.
RnR
Footballguy
Yeah. He flubbed the mocking. But the original post was incorrect. Donald spelled choker as chocker twice. And spelled Lightweight as leightweight. And spelled honor as honer.bolzano said:
Political fights about grammar are weak, but so is a presidential candidate throwing out typo-laced tirades on Twitter.
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
Man that endorsement from Jim "look at this snowball, global warming must be a hoax" Inhofe looks to have really paid dividends for Rubio.
cstu
Footballguy
Willie Neslon
Footballguy
Why does this guy end every speech with "new American century"? Did the phrase test well in focus groups or something? It doesn't eve make sense. And someone tell him it's pronounced "nu" not "nyoo".
RnR
Footballguy
Because it's his campaign slogan?
I guess we could debate the merits of that slogan in 2016, but your question is akin to wondering why Donald Trump says he's going to "Make America Great Again" at the end of speeches.
This is what politicians do.
Willie Neslon
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Don't you think Trump was hyperventilating today? He seems unstable, he came unspooled today. This is not a swipe at Trump, it just seems like Rubio got under his skin and it's still bugging him.
Last edited by a moderator:
RnR
Footballguy
Well, I think Marco's premise is that the beginning of this century has not been up to the standards set by the previous generation(s) in the latter half of the previous century, and that electing him would restore the idea that this generation could, too, enjoy a "new" century full of American prosperity.
I'm with you, though. It could certainly be better.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rove!
Footballguy
He needs to experience of the world to mellow him a bit...he also needs to show that he can manage things...like his finances
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
He also needs to realize that saying that his goal is to spend eternity with his creator will turn off voters with functioning mental faculties.
SIDA!
Footballguy
Who specifically are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone upset..but I have been a little out of touch today (more than lately anyway).
Interesting discussion on Rubio's healthcare plan and the difference (?) between Obama's individual mandate and a tax credit:
Trump has disavowed his support for an individual mandate. Will Rubio do the same?
When Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump momentarily embraced Obamacare’s individual mandate before disavowing it, Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives caught the vapors. But where is conservative outrage over Marco Rubio’s health plan, which actually contains an individual mandate?
Rubio, unlike his opponents, has offered details on how he would replace Obamacare. (Trump merely promises “something terrific.”) He builds his replacement plan around an individual mandate, and an expansion of Obamacare’s spending. Rubio’s plan is so similar to Obamacare, so disruptive, and so easily demagogued, you would think he was a Democratic mole.
The centerpiece of Rubio’s proposal would “provid[e] every American with an advanceable, refundable tax credit that can be used to purchase insurance.” What does that mean? If you purchase a government-approved health plan, you could save, for example, $2,000 on your taxes. If you don’t, you pay that $2,000 to the government.
That is exactly how Obamacare’s individual mandate works. No less an authority than John Goodman, the dean of conservative health-care reformers, says tax credits are a “financial mandate” to purchase health insurance. Rubio’s tax credit would thus give the federal government as much power to force you to purchase unwanted coverage as Obamacare does. Under Obamacare, the federal government gets to decide what coverage you must buy in order to avoid the penalty. Under Rubio’s plan, the federal government would have the same power.
Rubio’s tax credit would thus give the federal government as much power to force you to purchase unwanted coverage as Obamacare does. Under Obamacare, the federal government gets to decide what coverage you must buy in order to avoid the penalty. Under Rubio’s plan, the federal government would have the same power.
For many Americans, Rubio’s mandate could be more punitive than Obamacare’s. Rubio hasn’t specified the precise penalty he would make you pay the IRS if you failed to purchase a government-approved plan, but other tax-credit proposals would create penalties that rival Obamacare’s.
The similarities to Obamacare don’t end there.
Rubio’s tax credits, like Obamacare’s, are “refundable.” That means that if your tax liability is zero, you get a $2,000 check from the government. Obamacare’s so-called “tax credits” are actually 80 percent government spending. Rubio’s plan takes this concept and expands it to 10 or 20 times as many people as Obamacare does.
As if that weren’t bad enough, Rubio’s plan involves unnecessary tax increases and fails to protect workers, features that Democrats will demagogue ruthlessly. Commendably, Rubio tries to make health insurance more secure by eliminating the tax preference for employer-sponsored insurance. But his approach is ham-handed and self-defeating. Rather than cut taxes for everyone, he would level the playing field by taxing many workers’ health benefits.
Commendably, Rubio tries to make health insurance more secure by eliminating the tax preference for employer-sponsored insurance. But his approach is ham-handed and self-defeating. Rather than cut taxes for everyone, he would level the playing field by taxing many workers’ health benefits.
Perhaps most troubling is that, even though employers could respond to his plan by dropping their health benefits, Rubio would do nothing to return to workers the money their employers spend on their health benefits. For workers with the average family plan, that’s $13,000 of their earnings that Rubio does nothing to try to put into the worker’s hands immediately. As a result, Democrats will demagogue Rubio’s plan exactly the way Barack Obama demagogued John McCain’s tax-credit proposal in 2008.
Republicans have an alternative that would avoid these pitfalls. Expanding tax-free health savings accounts would move in the opposite direction of Obamacare by reducing health-care costs, making health insurance more secure, and delivering an effective tax cut of $9 trillion over ten years. That’s larger than all the Reagan and Bush tax cuts combined. “Large” HSAs would also allow more secure insurance products—innovations that Rubio’s tax credit would block
Were it not for Donald Trump, Marco Rubio’s individual mandate might be the most ridiculous thing happening in the Republican party this campaign season. Even as every Republican candidate for national office promises to repeal and replace Obamacare, the favorite candidate of both the GOP establishment and the “reformocon” class of conservative intellectuals is promising to cement many of Obamacare’s worst features in place — including its least popular provision — by giving them a conservative imprimatur.
Republicans may not have noticed the similarities between Rubio’s health plan and Obamacare, but Democrats certainly will. If the GOP’s presidential candidate marches under the banner of health-insurance tax credits, this will be the second presidential election in a row in which Republicans have denied voters a clear choice on Obamacare by nominating a candidate who has zero credibility as an Obamacare critic. Democrats will expose the hypocrisy, and voters will rightly dismiss Republican criticisms of Obamacare as a partisan charade.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431935/marco-rubio-healthcare-individual-mandate
Trump has disavowed his support for an individual mandate. Will Rubio do the same?
When Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump momentarily embraced Obamacare’s individual mandate before disavowing it, Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives caught the vapors. But where is conservative outrage over Marco Rubio’s health plan, which actually contains an individual mandate?
Rubio, unlike his opponents, has offered details on how he would replace Obamacare. (Trump merely promises “something terrific.”) He builds his replacement plan around an individual mandate, and an expansion of Obamacare’s spending. Rubio’s plan is so similar to Obamacare, so disruptive, and so easily demagogued, you would think he was a Democratic mole.
The centerpiece of Rubio’s proposal would “provid[e] every American with an advanceable, refundable tax credit that can be used to purchase insurance.” What does that mean? If you purchase a government-approved health plan, you could save, for example, $2,000 on your taxes. If you don’t, you pay that $2,000 to the government.
That is exactly how Obamacare’s individual mandate works. No less an authority than John Goodman, the dean of conservative health-care reformers, says tax credits are a “financial mandate” to purchase health insurance. Rubio’s tax credit would thus give the federal government as much power to force you to purchase unwanted coverage as Obamacare does. Under Obamacare, the federal government gets to decide what coverage you must buy in order to avoid the penalty. Under Rubio’s plan, the federal government would have the same power.
Rubio’s tax credit would thus give the federal government as much power to force you to purchase unwanted coverage as Obamacare does. Under Obamacare, the federal government gets to decide what coverage you must buy in order to avoid the penalty. Under Rubio’s plan, the federal government would have the same power.
For many Americans, Rubio’s mandate could be more punitive than Obamacare’s. Rubio hasn’t specified the precise penalty he would make you pay the IRS if you failed to purchase a government-approved plan, but other tax-credit proposals would create penalties that rival Obamacare’s.
The similarities to Obamacare don’t end there.
Rubio’s tax credits, like Obamacare’s, are “refundable.” That means that if your tax liability is zero, you get a $2,000 check from the government. Obamacare’s so-called “tax credits” are actually 80 percent government spending. Rubio’s plan takes this concept and expands it to 10 or 20 times as many people as Obamacare does.
As if that weren’t bad enough, Rubio’s plan involves unnecessary tax increases and fails to protect workers, features that Democrats will demagogue ruthlessly. Commendably, Rubio tries to make health insurance more secure by eliminating the tax preference for employer-sponsored insurance. But his approach is ham-handed and self-defeating. Rather than cut taxes for everyone, he would level the playing field by taxing many workers’ health benefits.
Commendably, Rubio tries to make health insurance more secure by eliminating the tax preference for employer-sponsored insurance. But his approach is ham-handed and self-defeating. Rather than cut taxes for everyone, he would level the playing field by taxing many workers’ health benefits.
Perhaps most troubling is that, even though employers could respond to his plan by dropping their health benefits, Rubio would do nothing to return to workers the money their employers spend on their health benefits. For workers with the average family plan, that’s $13,000 of their earnings that Rubio does nothing to try to put into the worker’s hands immediately. As a result, Democrats will demagogue Rubio’s plan exactly the way Barack Obama demagogued John McCain’s tax-credit proposal in 2008.
Republicans have an alternative that would avoid these pitfalls. Expanding tax-free health savings accounts would move in the opposite direction of Obamacare by reducing health-care costs, making health insurance more secure, and delivering an effective tax cut of $9 trillion over ten years. That’s larger than all the Reagan and Bush tax cuts combined. “Large” HSAs would also allow more secure insurance products—innovations that Rubio’s tax credit would block
Were it not for Donald Trump, Marco Rubio’s individual mandate might be the most ridiculous thing happening in the Republican party this campaign season. Even as every Republican candidate for national office promises to repeal and replace Obamacare, the favorite candidate of both the GOP establishment and the “reformocon” class of conservative intellectuals is promising to cement many of Obamacare’s worst features in place — including its least popular provision — by giving them a conservative imprimatur.
Republicans may not have noticed the similarities between Rubio’s health plan and Obamacare, but Democrats certainly will. If the GOP’s presidential candidate marches under the banner of health-insurance tax credits, this will be the second presidential election in a row in which Republicans have denied voters a clear choice on Obamacare by nominating a candidate who has zero credibility as an Obamacare critic. Democrats will expose the hypocrisy, and voters will rightly dismiss Republican criticisms of Obamacare as a partisan charade.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431935/marco-rubio-healthcare-individual-mandate
Mister CIA
Footballguy
Last night when Trump said Rubio looked like he just stepped out of a pool, I thought (being February and all that it implies) that he was saying Rubio's manhood was Costanza-esque.
Last edited by a moderator:
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Mister CIA
Footballguy
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
I don't like Rubio but I thought this was pretty good. A Trump supporter showed up at his rally to heckle him as an "empty suit" with a sign and a hanger. Rubio said "Empty suit? At least it's not made in China." Dumb, but the crowd cheered. As the protester was being led away Rubio goes "Ladies and Gentlemen, the valedictorian of Trump University!"
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
Little Marco is lame when it comes to the insult game.
Jayrok
Footballguy
Rubio swapping insults with Trump is a mistake and it won't work the way he wants because he comes off looking like a school yard kid trying to get people off of him by trying to get them to join him at hurling insults at the bully.
It's a presidential race, not a rap battle. Trump's strength is playing the bully. Deal with it.
IMO, the way Rubio can make an impact is during the next debate. When he has the floor, don't go after Trump's hiring foreigners to build a hotel over 30 years ago, or hammering him about tax returns. People don't care about that.
Rubio should offer some of his time to Trump by asking him to provide some details on his policies, such as health care. And don't jump in and mock him by talking about circles around states... let him expand. And when he doesn't, keep asking him.. "the floor is yours." Trump probably won't offer any more than "remove the circles and it will create competition for HC companies." Then he'll try to change the subject.
Stay on him about competition. So yes, there's competition for HC companies to get coverage business. What next? Do the employers purchase the HC competitors offers? or does the individual have to pay for a HC policy? What if the individual is unemployed, does the HC policy come out of their pockets? Government subsidies? You are opposed to Obama-care, as we all are. What are your specific plans to help Americans get health coverage? Or is your answer just opening up competition? Help us understand what your policy consists of beyond preventing company A from monopolizing the industry.
If Trump doesn't offer details, then ask the audience is this all they can expect from the candidate. "We'll figure it all out once I'm in office" just doesn't seem like a good enough platform for the republican party. The media will run with that and give Rubio free publicity for stumping Trump. But insults won't work. Insults give Trump that out when they are on stage. He can get defensive and claim they're all against him. Instead, put him in the spotlight and let him sink or swim on his own policies.
It's a presidential race, not a rap battle. Trump's strength is playing the bully. Deal with it.
IMO, the way Rubio can make an impact is during the next debate. When he has the floor, don't go after Trump's hiring foreigners to build a hotel over 30 years ago, or hammering him about tax returns. People don't care about that.
Rubio should offer some of his time to Trump by asking him to provide some details on his policies, such as health care. And don't jump in and mock him by talking about circles around states... let him expand. And when he doesn't, keep asking him.. "the floor is yours." Trump probably won't offer any more than "remove the circles and it will create competition for HC companies." Then he'll try to change the subject.
Stay on him about competition. So yes, there's competition for HC companies to get coverage business. What next? Do the employers purchase the HC competitors offers? or does the individual have to pay for a HC policy? What if the individual is unemployed, does the HC policy come out of their pockets? Government subsidies? You are opposed to Obama-care, as we all are. What are your specific plans to help Americans get health coverage? Or is your answer just opening up competition? Help us understand what your policy consists of beyond preventing company A from monopolizing the industry.
If Trump doesn't offer details, then ask the audience is this all they can expect from the candidate. "We'll figure it all out once I'm in office" just doesn't seem like a good enough platform for the republican party. The media will run with that and give Rubio free publicity for stumping Trump. But insults won't work. Insults give Trump that out when they are on stage. He can get defensive and claim they're all against him. Instead, put him in the spotlight and let him sink or swim on his own policies.
bud29
Footballguy
Seems like he WAS more of a centrist but took a hard right turn after selling his soul for campaign contributions.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Another excellent post. I sum Rubio up as a tattletale, not just vs Trump but even when he is attacking the Clinton he sounds like a sore loser. He's not afraid to let it fly vs other politicians and he was late to the game vs Trump but he sounds so over matched by Donald when they discuss actual game plans. Trump was running circles around Rubio in business responses during the debates. Rubio will land punches and insults on Trump's foreign policy but all I heard from Rubio was "Palestine is not a RE deal"...actually Marco it sort of is. There is disputed land and certainly it goes way deeper but Rubio just sounds like a tattletale and nobody likes a tattletale.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
As do I. It is a last ditch effort to change the course of the election. Disappointing.
He would be better served to go at Trump's throat for the myriad of weaknesses he has such as the fact that almost every time he opens his mouth, he spouts out something that is either illegal, impossible or outside of the powers of the Presidency.
I know there are intelligent supporters of Trump but the majority of them must have less than a 6th grade social studies understanding of government and law.
Higgs
Footballguy
Something very fitting about this. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/271156-rubio-loses-voice-ahead-of-rally
saintfool
Dead sexy
From the article - “And if it means by the end of tonight, I don’t have a voice and I have to whisper how strongly I feel about the future of this country, then I’m willing to do it."
Paging WetDream...
Chadstroma
Footballguy
My last two hopes right now:
1) Cruz, Rubio and Kasich get in a room and agree that two of them drop out (hell, give one VP and the other Sec of State) so that their votes get pooled together and we can nominate someone other than Trump.
2) A brokered convention which I don't think there is any way Trump would come out winning.
It is so depressing that so many people can be so foolish to support someone so utterly void of any substance or depth. Add in all the fools supporting Sanders in the Democratic primary and my always steadfast optimism for America is turning into a feeling of unavoidable doom.
1) Cruz, Rubio and Kasich get in a room and agree that two of them drop out (hell, give one VP and the other Sec of State) so that their votes get pooled together and we can nominate someone other than Trump.
2) A brokered convention which I don't think there is any way Trump would come out winning.
It is so depressing that so many people can be so foolish to support someone so utterly void of any substance or depth. Add in all the fools supporting Sanders in the Democratic primary and my always steadfast optimism for America is turning into a feeling of unavoidable doom.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Option 3 is treating Trump so "unfairly" i.e. challenging him like any other candidate, so that he eventually takes up his own threat and leaves the party. That would at least extend out the campaign season against him several months, and Hilary is flawed enough that a Rubio/Kasich ticket could win it 92 style.
Last edited by a moderator:
Card Trader
Footballguy
This isn't as high on his list as promising that one day with him as President women will be allowed to vote, so no big deal he got it wrong.bolzano said:
Rubio Doesn’t Realize His Energy Policy Has Already Been Enacted
For almost three months the U.S. has been able to legally export crude oil, but Republican presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio is still campaigning on lifting the ban.
Rubio told supporters he would lift the ban as president at a private fundraiser in Texas Friday, and his campaign website has an entire page devoted to the need to lift the ban. “I would also allow American oil producers to be able to export,” Rubio said, when asked what he would do about poor oil prices as president. “Right now we’re not allowed to export.”
Congress lifted the ban in December as part of the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill it passed. “Oil companies rush to exploit end of U.S. crude export ban,” reported Reuters in the wake of the vote that ended a 40-year ban on crude oil exports.
A subsection of Rubio’s energy policy on his website echoes his remarks. “So how can we usher in a 21st Century energy agenda? We can start by eliminating government-imposed barriers to energy production and economic growth,” the page reads, which is titled: “It’s Time To Lift The Crude Oil Export Ban.”
Rubio missed the omnibus vote, opting to campaign for president instead. He later chalked up his absence to a vote against a bill full of “garbage.” “The outcome is already predetermined,” he told Greta Van Susteren on Fox News in December.
Rubio’s senate office and his campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/29/rubio-doesnt-realize-his-energy-policy-has-already-been-enacted-video/
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
Mods, can we merge this thread with the "Walking Dead" please?Chadstroma said:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
I am pretty convinced that we are witnessing the death of the GOP. I think this is going beyond a third party/independent challenger and heading towards a split of the GOP. Trump and his ignorant minions can resurrect the Know Nothing Party. Fitting is so many ways.SaintsInDome2006 said:
skol asylum
Footballguy
That's gonna leave a mark.bolzano said:
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
Minnesota?
Similar threads
