Official 2016 GOP thread: Is it really going to be Donald Trump?? (1 Viewer)

[Joe Summer]

I think with Walker gone, Kasich has an opportunity.

Let's say Trump actually wins Iowa. NH moderates are then desperate to find somebody else. Not Bush, too weak. Not Rubio, too conservative. So Kasich find have a window there...

i cant even pronounce his name

I keep thinking he's from the Wookiee home planet.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Walker fans - don't give up hope

http://www.buzzfeed.com/kyleblaine/scott-walker-is-dropping-out-of-republican-primary-race?utm_term=.jh5Gl30rq⊂=4031181_6923485#.pwPQKOMr7q

Just in case the link doesn't work right later:

Scott Walker framed his decision to drop out of the presidential race Monday as an attempt to bring order to the GOP’s unwieldy 2016 primaries.

But some of the Wisconsin governor’s loyalists are already talking up the possibility that if chaos continues to reign in the race, Walker could come back and win the Republican nomination from the convention floor next summer.

Two Republican strategists with ties to Wisconsin told BuzzFeed News that Walker’s allies have been floating the prospect in political circles. And a fundraiser for Walker, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that while he doesn’t know if the governor himself is behind the buzz, “with this campaign season, nothing would surprise me.”

In a press conference in Madison, Wisconsin, Walker said he felt “called to lead by helping to clear the field in this race.” He also encouraged other Republican presidential candidates to consider dropping out “so that voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative” to current frontrunner Donald Trump.

The likelihood of a brokered Republican convention in 2016 remains low, but the scenario has generated increased chatter in recent weeks as Trump hangs on to his lead in the polls, making the party establishment jittery.

“The longer we go with Trump or Carson at the head of the pack, the more likely it is that we get to Cleveland without a nominee,” said one GOP strategist with ties to Karl Rove’s super PAC American Crossroads.

Still, there is skepticism in Republican circles that Walker would be the consensus candidate to emerge victorious from a floor fight. One GOP source called it “crazy.”

And one of the strategists with ties to Wisconsin said, “The problem is that if you had a brokered convention scenario, [Walker] wouldn’t even be the most likely person out of Wisconsin to win the nomination. That would be Paul Ryan.”

-QG

 

[Rove!]

If it did wind up as a brokered convention, who gets the nod?

Who would each wing be able to live with in a compromise?

Walker seems like a possibility. I'm also thinking Kasich? Mitch Daniels? Rubio?

I'm thinking we'd have Rubio/Kasich

 

[Joe Summer]

If it did wind up as a brokered convention, who gets the nod?

Who would each wing be able to live with in a compromise?

Walker seems like a possibility. I'm also thinking Kasich? Mitch Daniels? Rubio?

I'm thinking we'd have Rubio/Kasich

Much of it will depend on the number of delegates controlled by each candidate. You also have to consider who has the most money left. If Bush has a large number of delegates and still has a good chunk of his $100M nest egg, then I'd think that the Republican power brokers would push for him.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

If there's a brokered convention, what would Trumps reaction be?

 

[culdeus]

So walker sent out a political mailer asking for donations. It cost more to send the mailer than it did in what they got back in donations.

 

[shadrap]

More than a few have claimed Fiorina reference a doctored video on a fetus abortion. I have no idea & I'm hesitant to watch so let us know. I'm not fishing/trolling, whatever & I respect the opinions here.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/23/new-graphic-ad-by-fiorina-pac-defends-abortion-comments/?intcmp=hpbt2

 

[The General]

If there's a brokered convention, what would Trumps reaction be?

Something tremendous.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

More than a few have claimed Fiorina reference a doctored video on a fetus abortion. I have no idea & I'm hesitant to watch so let us know. I'm not fishing/trolling, whatever & I respect the opinions here.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/23/new-graphic-ad-by-fiorina-pac-defends-abortion-comments/?intcmp=hpbt2

She lied. Everyone knows that. And most everyone has already taken the time to watch the PP videos.

She should have never ran with it... but she knows the evangelical people are non-thinking rubes who send money.

 

[cstu]

If there's a brokered convention, what would Trumps reaction be?

I'm the man to broker the convention, I've worked with brokers my entire life, they're terrific.

 

[QuizGuy66]

If it did wind up as a brokered convention, who gets the nod?

Who would each wing be able to live with in a compromise?

Walker seems like a possibility. I'm also thinking Kasich? Mitch Daniels? Rubio?

I'm thinking we'd have Rubio/Kasich

I'd put my money here.

It's more than a little tempting to so now at 200/1:

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/republican-candidate/bet-history/paul-ryan/today

-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

It would be great to see the first brokered convention since '52 (Stevenson) and first Republican one since '48 (Dewey).

That month-and-a-half after the last primaries would be the time it gets sorted out.

If Trump has the most delegates but a plurality at 35%-39% or so they could very well "steal" the nomination from him. I think it'd be a nuclear option. Even if he couldn't be on the ballot in many states he very well could encourage folks to write his name in.

The 2nd prospect is if Trump is in a strong second. Say Rubio has like 40% and Trump has like 32% of the delegates or whatever. For "the good of the party" there might be the appeal to Trump to unify things. He would do so at a cost, but what could that cost be - it's an open question. Trump could, I suppose force the right. In this scenario I do thing that anyone not named Ben Carson who had a delegate lead on Trump most likely would be put over the top by the 2nd ballot.

If things are really clustered though - if you have a situation with intractable candidates with stubborn supporters - which could happen and things look very locked up (or the candidates appear badly damaged) then you might have the chance that an outsider gets put in.

I firmly believe the most likely nominee who is not a declared Republican candidate is Paul Ryan. There are many logical reasons for this. I think that Republican felt good about how he ran for VP last time. Even though I could never vote for him, I can see that he acquitted himself fine in this regard and will grant him that. The big $ people in the party, especially on the establishment side are going to be leaning hard on folks to get things done by a 2nd ballot (which would be necessary to get Ryan the nod I am sure - simply for the fact of rules). Unlike say McPain/Palin, Ryan had a good relationship with the top of the ticket - I can easily see Romney going to bat for him in that elder statesman sort of role (once folks convince Mitt that he still isn't the guy to 'save the day'). I think different factions of the party could behind him. I think that in this sort of scenario Ryan would be compelled to accept. In a lot of ways a Ryan/Rubio ticket might be the best they could hope for on that side. If Trump is sincere about his ardour, perhaps the scenario may have to be Ryan/Cruz.

For those who like to play this stuff for $ - throw $50 bucks on Paul Ryan. Though if you win that $10k maybe buy me a nice dinner sometime Oh and then congratulate we when Ryan is defeated in the fall anyway

-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

I'd be dead solid shocked, I should say, if there someone would be a 3rd ballot. I cannot imagine it getting to that point.

Hope it does though

-QG

 

[Joe Summer]

It would be great to see the first brokered convention since '52 (Stevenson) and first Republican one since '48 (Dewey).

Does anyone remember Estes Kefauver? Also, check out these party platform positions:

- Federal aid for low-cost housing

- extension of Social Security benefits

- international arms control

- support of the U.N.

- support of an Equal Rights Amendment

- anti-segregation

- statehood for Puerto Rico

Geez, what a bunch of libs. No wonder they lost in '48.

 

[shadrap]

More than a few have claimed Fiorina reference a doctored video on a fetus abortion. I have no idea & I'm hesitant to watch so let us know. I'm not fishing/trolling, whatever & I respect the opinions here.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/23/new-graphic-ad-by-fiorina-pac-defends-abortion-comments/?intcmp=hpbt2

She lied. Everyone knows that. And most everyone has already taken the time to watch the PP videos.

She should have never ran with it... but she knows the evangelical people are non-thinking rubes who send money.

thank you.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Bush is such a mush:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/republicans-bush-multiculturalism-wrong-us-33960961

-QG

 

[bigbottom]

Bush is such a mush:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/republicans-bush-multiculturalism-wrong-us-33960961

-QG

You know, I was really trying to find a way to like this guy, but he can just eat a ####. What a spineless sap.

 

[Jamesbrownkid]

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2015-09-23.html#read_more

Good grief. Scott Walker can't even drop out of the presidential race without invoking Ronald Reagan! He began his exit speech, "As a kid, I was drawn to Ronald Reagan ..." then went on to read a statement written for him by GOP donors, calling on the other one-percenters (in the polls) to get out, so that the party can nominate a "conservative alternative to the current front-runner."

Which reminds me: Perhaps Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina are soaring in the polls not because they're "outsiders," but because they're not dumb. I notice that, other than Ted Cruz, they're the only GOP candidates for president who went to top schools.

Trump graduated from the Wharton School of Business and went on to make $11 billion. Carson went from Yale to the University of Michigan Medical School and was the first man to separate twins conjoined at the brain. Fiorina graduated from Stanford University and then earned $80 million in business.
By contrast, look up the educational achievement of the average pundit sneering at Trump’s idiocy and the ordinariness of his supporters. I won’t be as nasty as they are, but wow! – people who went to bush league schools shouldn’t throw stones. There's nothing wrong with attending a bush-league college. But maybe ease up on holding yourself out as a great intellectual appalled by the dirty masses if you went to a third-rate college in the era of need-blind admissions.

Until Trump started talking about immigration, most Americans had no idea that immigrants take more government assistance than natives, that we are allowing nearly half a million anchor babies a year to force their way into citizenship and a lifetime of welfare, and that we're bringing in rapists, murderers and terrorists.

Once the Democrats get the voters they want through immigration, they will be like kids in a candy store. What will they do first? Ban private ownership of guns? Strip Christian churches of their tax exemptions for being "homophobic"? Release criminals from prison? Imprison the police? It will be the LBJ and Carter administrations rolled into one for all time, without end.

All the debates we have now on talk radio and cable news will be completely irrelevant. The most left-wing policies imaginable will be enacted, with no opposition -- as they are today in California.

 

[MikeIke]

deep deep derp

And you are...?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

If it did wind up as a brokered convention, who gets the nod?

Who would each wing be able to live with in a compromise?

Walker seems like a possibility. I'm also thinking Kasich? Mitch Daniels? Rubio?

I'm thinking we'd have Rubio/Kasich

How does Walker seem like a possibility in a brokered convention? Don't you have to have some, you know, support? Dude went from first place to 1/2 of 1%

He didn't even have enough support to make his eventual endorsement worth anything.

 

[Mister CIA]

If there's a brokered convention, what would Trumps reaction be?

Something Trumpendous.

Fixed.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

All the debates we have now on talk radio and cable news will be completely irrelevant.

You mean they're not already?

 

[FlapJacks]

Ryan is unlikely to even bring Wisconsin with him

Ask Gore and Romney how tough it is to win when you cant even get your home state....

 

[Capella]

So walker sent out a political mailer asking for donations. It cost more to send the mailer than it did in what they got back in donations.

 

[Amused to Death]

More than a few have claimed Fiorina reference a doctored video on a fetus abortion. I have no idea & I'm hesitant to watch so let us know. I'm not fishing/trolling, whatever & I respect the opinions here.

Yeah, I don't get this one at all. Not a lot of wiggle room here.

She gave very specific details -- that 100% are not on the PP video.

So she said it was another video, but couldn't say which one or provide it.

Then when people keep pushing she splices together five different videos that still don't show what she claims to have seen.

Doing some reading on the videos and it turns out this was a months long coordinated effort by multiple anti-abortion groups. Interviews and taping began in January. The release of the first video was timed to help draw attention when there were anti-abortion laws being debated in Texas. They are purposely released 1 or 2 at a time to keep it in the news. Some statements by PP claim there are "employees" shown on video that were never employed by them (i.e. staged).

The outcry has been for defunding. Why not "justice"? Why not call for the firing of the offenders? Is it because to date no laws have been broken? Or because that's not issue and doesn't stir the base. Throw the red meat and watch the reactions.

 

[dschuler]

So walker sent out a political mailer asking for donations. It cost more to send the mailer than it did in what they got back in donations.

Made my night

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Obviously the Planned Parenthood stuff will hurt them more in the general. In the primaries, even lying about PP helps. Remember when they refer to "the Planned Parenthood video" they're not talking about a promotional video produced by PP. It was supposed to be a sting video - it was dishonest and deceptive from the start.

 

[dschuler]

Obviously the Planned Parenthood stuff will hurt them more in the general. In the primaries, even lying about PP helps. Remember when they refer to "the Planned Parenthood video" they're not talking about a promotional video produced by PP. It was supposed to be a sting video - it was dishonest and deceptive from the start.

The videos brings up a bigger issue. At 16-20 weeks old, a baby in a womb has fingerprints, can yawn, and suck it's own thumb. Is it morally wrong to disect these babies that are 100% human? These are not just blobs of matter that it would look like very early on in a pregnancy.

 

[joffer]

Sorry, I get that abortion is a tough issue, but fingerprints?

 

[Mister CIA]

So walker sent out a political mailer asking for donations. It cost more to send the mailer than it did in what they got back in donations.

Scott Walker, here's your sign!

 

[Doctor Detroit]

So walker sent out a political mailer asking for donations. It cost more to send the mailer than it did in what they got back in donations.

Made my night

 

[CBusAlex]

If there's a brokered convention, what would Trumps reaction be?

I half expect that Trump's plan the whole time has been to pick up enough delegates that he can wrangle some political favors from one of the other candidates in exchange for his support at the convention. Hey, maybe Rubio can finally get him a casino in Florida.

 

[CBusAlex]

Sorry, I get that abortion is a tough issue, but fingerprints?

AND they can yawn, a behavior only found in other 100% humans like dogs and parakeets.

 

[John Bender]

Wish we could get a R candidate that would toe the line and not fold during the primary season into religious and personal freedom cramping bull####. There's some really smart people on the R side of things that would make great Presidents if they didn't have to pander to the religious side of the party. It's a shame, we'll probably never see one of those really smart Repubs become President.

The crazies need to split into a new party.

They did. They're called "Democrats".

I realize this is a joke but this would be an ideal party for me.

No or little social programs provided by the government.

Keep my taxes at a bare minimum by focusing on spending cuts as opposed to taxing more.

Stop giving a #### what gay people do.

Stop talking about religion or the bible as political stance.

Use the Obama foreign policy (the best foreign policy Prez in my lifetime, IMO) as a good template for staying out of #### across the world.

I guess this already exists and it's called being a libertarian?

John, I appreciate the libertarian view as much as the next guy... but Obamas foreign policy is going to come back to haunt us. The middle east is currently being taken over by ISIS, due in large part because we prematurely moved forces out. Russia is taking over it's neighbors and building political capital by providing terrorist nations with weapons and Iran just closed a nuke deal that is a dream come true for them.

As the worlds super power we have maintained relative peace for decades. It's already getting scary and if the next administration follows course it will get worse. We have some great advantages being the leader of the world but with it comes responsibility. One of the ways we have provided leadership was through a strong military that deterred conflict. Refusing this responsibility is going to have massive negative consequences down the road.

I can appreciate your perspective Sublime and I'm, unfortunately, not intelligent or well informed enough to dispute it. I really am politically naive, uninformed and just go with my own take based on opinions like this. I just enjoy the state of peace we've been in for 8 years now, and really resent the war in Iraq based on all it's cost us and how useless it turned out with re: WMDs. i don't appreciate what the Iraq War did to us, and I do appreciate how Obama has managed to keep places like Russia at bay with diplomacy and soft rhetoric as opposed to direct disrespectful rhetoric. I hope our next Prez will keep us in the same state of apathy as opposed to hawkishness. Kick back on Russia's delusions of grandeur just dont move the needle for me in terms of my general political outlook. Again - respect your position and appreciate that you can present it in a concise and respectful manner but it's just not a priority for me.

The only evidence you need about my level of understanding on foreign policy is that I feel Rubio is the only viable candidate the ®'s have and I was quickly disavowed of my take by the masses here who let me know that he was the most hawkish of all of the ® candidates - something I'm not cool with.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Strip Christian churches of their tax exemptions for being "homophobic"?

Not for being homophobic. Simply for being a being an obvious "for profit" industry.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Wish we could get a R candidate that would toe the line and not fold during the primary season into religious and personal freedom cramping bull####. There's some really smart people on the R side of things that would make great Presidents if they didn't have to pander to the religious side of the party. It's a shame, we'll probably never see one of those really smart Repubs become President.

The crazies need to split into a new party.

They did. They're called "Democrats".

I realize this is a joke but this would be an ideal party for me.

No or little social programs provided by the government.

Keep my taxes at a bare minimum by focusing on spending cuts as opposed to taxing more.

Stop giving a #### what gay people do.

Stop talking about religion or the bible as political stance.

Use the Obama foreign policy (the best foreign policy Prez in my lifetime, IMO) as a good template for staying out of #### across the world.

I guess this already exists and it's called being a libertarian?

John, I appreciate the libertarian view as much as the next guy... but Obamas foreign policy is going to come back to haunt us. The middle east is currently being taken over by ISIS, due in large part because we prematurely moved forces out. Russia is taking over it's neighbors and building political capital by providing terrorist nations with weapons and Iran just closed a nuke deal that is a dream come true for them.

As the worlds super power we have maintained relative peace for decades. It's already getting scary and if the next administration follows course it will get worse. We have some great advantages being the leader of the world but with it comes responsibility. One of the ways we have provided leadership was through a strong military that deterred conflict. Refusing this responsibility is going to have massive negative consequences down the road.

I can appreciate your perspective Sublime and I'm, unfortunately, not intelligent or well informed enough to dispute it. I really am politically naive, uninformed and just go with my own take based on opinions like this. I just enjoy the state of peace we've been in for 8 years now, and really resent the war in Iraq based on all it's cost us and how useless it turned out with re: WMDs. i don't appreciate what the Iraq War did to us, and I do appreciate how Obama has managed to keep places like Russia at bay with diplomacy and soft rhetoric as opposed to direct disrespectful rhetoric. I hope our next Prez will keep us in the same state of apathy as opposed to hawkishness. Kick back on Russia's delusions of grandeur just dont move the needle for me in terms of my general political outlook. Again - respect your position and appreciate that you can present it in a concise and respectful manner but it's just not a priority for me.

The only evidence you need about my level of understanding on foreign policy is that I feel Rubio is the only viable candidate the ®'s have and I was quickly disavowed of my take by the masses here who let me know that he was the most hawkish of all of the ® candidates - something I'm not cool with.

The Iran deal is not a bad deal for anyone. If we let them continue on course and then decided to bomb their facilities, they'd be back up in three years and we'd have to start all over again. Now the international community has a 15 year plan to ensure Iran does not develop a weapon, and this was signed off on by Russia, China, and our closest allies sans Israel. If Iran missteps they will face further sanctions and be in the same spot (facing military action) as they are today.

The reason this is getting so much negative press is not because it is a bad deal, but because Israel is really angry and they are throwing a ton of money at a marketing campaign to tell everyone domestically how terrible a deal it is. Most Americans know little about foreign policy, it is basically offering a free Big and slurpee to Jeff in Alabama to climb on board, and Jeff is now a foreign policy expert and hates the deal.

Russia is who they always are. They annex territory and frighten their neighbors, same as it's been for most of my life. They do not have the domestic resources or the infrastructure to regain their former status, so they bully their neighbors in trying to revive some sense of Russian hegemony. As per usual, they are just a giant bore.

ISIS is the slipperiest of slopes. We want Assad out but out bigger enemy by far is ISIS. It's the same thing we faced in 2003 when we had Al-Qaeda and the Taliban under control and we were slaying the enemies of America. Then GWB and his far-right wing hawk advisors said we needed to go to Iraq, because Sadaam was so damn dangerous. He had nothing to do with 9/11, kept Iran at bay, and generally ran his country like most countries in Africa we don't care about. $2 trillion and 5k+ American lives later Obama made a campaign promise to get out, because that's what the public wanted. So we got out.

Now ISIS spreading is all Obama's fault. Our decision not to go to Syria was just, standing back and watching it play out was the best move possible and the Russian military build up in Syria tells us as much. Let them fight ISIS, let's see what happens when a country with technology 30+ years behind us fights these guys on their home turf for the Assad regime. Oh wait, yeah Russia has done this before and failed miserably.

Additionally people don't consider ISIS and what they mean to Iran. This is essentially the Iranians biggest nightmare, and they have an interest in seeing ISIS fail and be wiped off the face of the earth. So we wait, because Iran is not only going to follow the nuke deal because of ISIS, but they are going to eventually ask us for assistance.

Sometimes waiting and monitoring is effective foreign policy. We have been way too involved in military operations over the past 14 years and the nation and the troops are tired of fighting wars that can never be won. That's the long and the short of it, it's a complex and rapidly evolving world right now and we have a lot of irons in the fire already. We can't simply get involved to get involved or go through yet another Iraq, Obama has been very calculated in his policy and I think it will probably be judged as the biggest strength of his presidency.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Strip Christian churches of their tax exemptions for being "homophobic"?

Not for being homophobic. Simply for being a being an obvious "for profit" industry.

God help me I agree with you.

 

[Mister CIA]

Strip Christian churches of their tax exemptions for being "homophobic"?

Not for being homophobic. Simply for being a being an obvious "for profit" industry.

God help me I agree with you.

:wrysmile:

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Obviously the Planned Parenthood stuff will hurt them more in the general. In the primaries, even lying about PP helps. Remember when they refer to "the Planned Parenthood video" they're not talking about a promotional video produced by PP. It was supposed to be a sting video - it was dishonest and deceptive from the start.

The videos brings up a bigger issue. At 16-20 weeks old, a baby in a womb has fingerprints, can yawn, and suck it's own thumb. Is it morally wrong to disect these babies that are 100% human? These are not just blobs of matter that it would look like very early on in a pregnancy.

If it is morally wrong to a pregnant woman, then she should choose not to have an abortion. That's standard abortion debate.

Shopping sting videos and misrepresenting what PP does,

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

If there's a brokered convention, what would Trumps reaction be?

I half expect that Trump's plan the whole time has been to pick up enough delegates that he can wrangle some political favors from one of the other candidates in exchange for his support at the convention. Hey, maybe Rubio can finally get him a casino in Florida.

Florida already has casinos. Not sure why Jeb that was some kind of stand.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Strip Christian churches of their tax exemptions for being "homophobic"?

Not for being homophobic. Simply for being a being an obvious "for profit" industry.

God help me I agree with you.

:wrysmile:

:killingit:

 

[Zegras11]

Trump said he wants to raise taxes, is pro-choice, and isn't a bible thumper. He is more moderate than other Republicans in the field because most of them are lunatics.

Correct. How is this confusing to anyone.

It's only confusing if you're looking solely at his "position" on illegal immigration. Of one isn't fully on board with opening up the floodgates, they are immediately thrown in Tim's "conservative" bucket. The problem is, you aren't up to date on the Timtionary definitions.

Exactly. I am sure millions of Democrats who voted for Obama would be shocked to learn that they are conservatives.

No.

First off, I never called Trump a conservative. I just don't think he's a moderate. He's a populist nativist IMO.

Second, I don't believe that calling for the forced deportation of millions of illegal immigrants is a conservative position. I don't believe the majority of conservatives believe in this, nor do the majority of Americans or independents. It's an extreme position.

He also hasn't said he is going to do this. What he has said is he doesn't know what his solution will look like but he is going to find people that know more than he does about immigration and work with them to come up with a solution.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform

All criminal aliens must be returned to their home countries

That would leave all your nice aliens you love so much. What's not to like here?

 

[Rove!]

Wish we could get a R candidate that would toe the line and not fold during the primary season into religious and personal freedom cramping bull####. There's some really smart people on the R side of things that would make great Presidents if they didn't have to pander to the religious side of the party. It's a shame, we'll probably never see one of those really smart Repubs become President.

The crazies need to split into a new party.

They did. They're called "Democrats".

I realize this is a joke but this would be an ideal party for me.No or little social programs provided by the government.

Keep my taxes at a bare minimum by focusing on spending cuts as opposed to taxing more.

Stop giving a #### what gay people do.

Stop talking about religion or the bible as political stance.

Use the Obama foreign policy (the best foreign policy Prez in my lifetime, IMO) as a good template for staying out of #### across the world.

I guess this already exists and it's called being a libertarian?

John, I appreciate the libertarian view as much as the next guy... but Obamas foreign policy is going to come back to haunt us. The middle east is currently being taken over by ISIS, due in large part because we prematurely moved forces out. Russia is taking over it's neighbors and building political capital by providing terrorist nations with weapons and Iran just closed a nuke deal that is a dream come true for them.

As the worlds super power we have maintained relative peace for decades. It's already getting scary and if the next administration follows course it will get worse. We have some great advantages being the leader of the world but with it comes responsibility. One of the ways we have provided leadership was through a strong military that deterred conflict. Refusing this responsibility is going to have massive negative consequences down the road.

I can appreciate your perspective Sublime and I'm, unfortunately, not intelligent or well informed enough to dispute it. I really am politically naive, uninformed and just go with my own take based on opinions like this. I just enjoy the state of peace we've been in for 8 years now, and really resent the war in Iraq based on all it's cost us and how useless it turned out with re: WMDs. i don't appreciate what the Iraq War did to us, and I do appreciate how Obama has managed to keep places like Russia at bay with diplomacy and soft rhetoric as opposed to direct disrespectful rhetoric. I hope our next Prez will keep us in the same state of apathy as opposed to hawkishness. Kick back on Russia's delusions of grandeur just dont move the needle for me in terms of my general political outlook. Again - respect your position and appreciate that you can present it in a concise and respectful manner but it's just not a priority for me. The only evidence you need about my level of understanding on foreign policy is that I feel Rubio is the only viable candidate the ®'s have and I was quickly disavowed of my take by the masses here who let me know that he was the most hawkish of all of the ® candidates - something I'm not cool with.

The Iran deal is not a bad deal for anyone. If we let them continue on course and then decided to bomb their facilities, they'd be back up in three years and we'd have to start all over again. Now the international community has a 15 year plan to ensure Iran does not develop a weapon, and this was signed off on by Russia, China, and our closest allies sans Israel. If Iran missteps they will face further sanctions and be in the same spot (facing military action) as they are today. The reason this is getting so much negative press is not because it is a bad deal, but because Israel is really angry and they are throwing a ton of money at a marketing campaign to tell everyone domestically how terrible a deal it is. Most Americans know little about foreign policy, it is basically offering a free Big and slurpee to Jeff in Alabama to climb on board, and Jeff is now a foreign policy expert and hates the deal.

Russia is who they always are. They annex territory and frighten their neighbors, same as it's been for most of my life. They do not have the domestic resources or the infrastructure to regain their former status, so they bully their neighbors in trying to revive some sense of Russian hegemony. As per usual, they are just a giant bore.

ISIS is the slipperiest of slopes. We want Assad out but out bigger enemy by far is ISIS. It's the same thing we faced in 2003 when we had Al-Qaeda and the Taliban under control and we were slaying the enemies of America. Then GWB and his far-right wing hawk advisors said we needed to go to Iraq, because Sadaam was so damn dangerous. He had nothing to do with 9/11, kept Iran at bay, and generally ran his country like most countries in Africa we don't care about. $2 trillion and 5k+ American lives later Obama made a campaign promise to get out, because that's what the public wanted. So we got out.

Now ISIS spreading is all Obama's fault. Our decision not to go to Syria was just, standing back and watching it play out was the best move possible and the Russian military build up in Syria tells us as much. Let them fight ISIS, let's see what happens when a country with technology 30+ years behind us fights these guys on their home turf for the Assad regime. Oh wait, yeah Russia has done this before and failed miserably.

Additionally people don't consider ISIS and what they mean to Iran. This is essentially the Iranians biggest nightmare, and they have an interest in seeing ISIS fail and be wiped off the face of the earth. So we wait, because Iran is not only going to follow the nuke deal because of ISIS, but they are going to eventually ask us for assistance.

Sometimes waiting and monitoring is effective foreign policy. We have been way too involved in military operations over the past 14 years and the nation and the troops are tired of fighting wars that can never be won. That's the long and the short of it, it's a complex and rapidly evolving world right now and we have a lot of irons in the fire already. We can't simply get involved to get involved or go through yet another Iraq, Obama has been very calculated in his policy and I think it will probably be judged as the biggest strength of his presidency.

The decision to go to war in the first place had bipartisan support.

If we had managed post war Iraq properly, then they would still be a buffer for Iran. The first mistake was banning the ba'athists. The second mistake was letting Maliki run roughshod over the Sunnis. The third mistake was not negotiating a new forces agreement.

After seeing how much chaos deposing Saddam created in the region, we thought it would be a good idea to depose Assad. Huge mistake, as our arming of the "rebels" make ISIS a powerful force and helped to create the biggest humanitarian crisis since WW II.

 

[the moops]

Armchair foreign policy specialists are indeed the most stubborn bunch. So set in what they believe that they can not even stop for a second to think that perhaps they have less than full information. And that the very things they espouse as the correct way to handle things would just as likely #### things up even more

 

[Rove!]

Armchair foreign policy specialists are indeed the most stubborn bunch. So set in what they believe that they can not even stop for a second to think that perhaps they have less than full information. And that the very things they espouse as the correct way to handle things would just as likely #### things up even more

Because our foreign policy has been so wondrously successful over the last 25 years.....

 

[lod01]

So walker sent out a political mailer asking for donations. It cost more to send the mailer than it did in what they got back in donations.

What a loser.

 

[lod01]

More than a few have claimed Fiorina reference a doctored video on a fetus abortion. I have no idea & I'm hesitant to watch so let us know. I'm not fishing/trolling, whatever & I respect the opinions here.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/23/new-graphic-ad-by-fiorina-pac-defends-abortion-comments/?intcmp=hpbt2

She lied. Everyone knows that. And most everyone has already taken the time to watch the PP videos.

She should have never ran with it... but she knows the evangelical people are non-thinking rubes who send money.

She's highly capable of conning stupid people so that gives her a chance. She probably knows that she needs to go after the stupid people.

 

[James Daulton]

Wish we could get a R candidate that would toe the line and not fold during the primary season into religious and personal freedom cramping bull####. There's some really smart people on the R side of things that would make great Presidents if they didn't have to pander to the religious side of the party. It's a shame, we'll probably never see one of those really smart Repubs become President.

The crazies need to split into a new party.

They did. They're called "Democrats".

I realize this is a joke but this would be an ideal party for me.No or little social programs provided by the government.

Keep my taxes at a bare minimum by focusing on spending cuts as opposed to taxing more.

Stop giving a #### what gay people do.

Stop talking about religion or the bible as political stance.

Use the Obama foreign policy (the best foreign policy Prez in my lifetime, IMO) as a good template for staying out of #### across the world.

I guess this already exists and it's called being a libertarian?

John, I appreciate the libertarian view as much as the next guy... but Obamas foreign policy is going to come back to haunt us. The middle east is currently being taken over by ISIS, due in large part because we prematurely moved forces out. Russia is taking over it's neighbors and building political capital by providing terrorist nations with weapons and Iran just closed a nuke deal that is a dream come true for them.

As the worlds super power we have maintained relative peace for decades. It's already getting scary and if the next administration follows course it will get worse. We have some great advantages being the leader of the world but with it comes responsibility. One of the ways we have provided leadership was through a strong military that deterred conflict. Refusing this responsibility is going to have massive negative consequences down the road.

I can appreciate your perspective Sublime and I'm, unfortunately, not intelligent or well informed enough to dispute it. I really am politically naive, uninformed and just go with my own take based on opinions like this. I just enjoy the state of peace we've been in for 8 years now, and really resent the war in Iraq based on all it's cost us and how useless it turned out with re: WMDs. i don't appreciate what the Iraq War did to us, and I do appreciate how Obama has managed to keep places like Russia at bay with diplomacy and soft rhetoric as opposed to direct disrespectful rhetoric. I hope our next Prez will keep us in the same state of apathy as opposed to hawkishness. Kick back on Russia's delusions of grandeur just dont move the needle for me in terms of my general political outlook. Again - respect your position and appreciate that you can present it in a concise and respectful manner but it's just not a priority for me. The only evidence you need about my level of understanding on foreign policy is that I feel Rubio is the only viable candidate the ®'s have and I was quickly disavowed of my take by the masses here who let me know that he was the most hawkish of all of the ® candidates - something I'm not cool with.

The Iran deal is not a bad deal for anyone. If we let them continue on course and then decided to bomb their facilities, they'd be back up in three years and we'd have to start all over again. Now the international community has a 15 year plan to ensure Iran does not develop a weapon, and this was signed off on by Russia, China, and our closest allies sans Israel. If Iran missteps they will face further sanctions and be in the same spot (facing military action) as they are today. The reason this is getting so much negative press is not because it is a bad deal, but because Israel is really angry and they are throwing a ton of money at a marketing campaign to tell everyone domestically how terrible a deal it is. Most Americans know little about foreign policy, it is basically offering a free Big and slurpee to Jeff in Alabama to climb on board, and Jeff is now a foreign policy expert and hates the deal.

Russia is who they always are. They annex territory and frighten their neighbors, same as it's been for most of my life. They do not have the domestic resources or the infrastructure to regain their former status, so they bully their neighbors in trying to revive some sense of Russian hegemony. As per usual, they are just a giant bore.

ISIS is the slipperiest of slopes. We want Assad out but out bigger enemy by far is ISIS. It's the same thing we faced in 2003 when we had Al-Qaeda and the Taliban under control and we were slaying the enemies of America. Then GWB and his far-right wing hawk advisors said we needed to go to Iraq, because Sadaam was so damn dangerous. He had nothing to do with 9/11, kept Iran at bay, and generally ran his country like most countries in Africa we don't care about. $2 trillion and 5k+ American lives later Obama made a campaign promise to get out, because that's what the public wanted. So we got out.

Now ISIS spreading is all Obama's fault. Our decision not to go to Syria was just, standing back and watching it play out was the best move possible and the Russian military build up in Syria tells us as much. Let them fight ISIS, let's see what happens when a country with technology 30+ years behind us fights these guys on their home turf for the Assad regime. Oh wait, yeah Russia has done this before and failed miserably.

Additionally people don't consider ISIS and what they mean to Iran. This is essentially the Iranians biggest nightmare, and they have an interest in seeing ISIS fail and be wiped off the face of the earth. So we wait, because Iran is not only going to follow the nuke deal because of ISIS, but they are going to eventually ask us for assistance.

Sometimes waiting and monitoring is effective foreign policy. We have been way too involved in military operations over the past 14 years and the nation and the troops are tired of fighting wars that can never be won. That's the long and the short of it, it's a complex and rapidly evolving world right now and we have a lot of irons in the fire already. We can't simply get involved to get involved or go through yet another Iraq, Obama has been very calculated in his policy and I think it will probably be judged as the biggest strength of his presidency.

The decision to go to war in the first place had bipartisan support.

If we had managed post war Iraq properly, then they would still be a buffer for Iran. The first mistake was banning the ba'athists. The second mistake was letting Maliki run roughshod over the Sunnis. The third mistake was not negotiating a new forces agreement.

After seeing how much chaos deposing Saddam created in the region, we thought it would be a good idea to depose Assad. Huge mistake, as our arming of the "rebels" make ISIS a powerful force and helped to create the biggest humanitarian crisis since WW II.

When have outsiders ever been able to "manage" anything well in that part of the world? If we could go back in time to 2003, anyone still recommending we invade Iraq would be labeled a lunatic.

 

[FlapJacks]

The decision to go to war in the first place had bipartisan support.

Based on faulty intelligence and exaggerated threats. Not many outside the true neo-Con believers would have signed up for that war without it.

and two different administrations touted that intelligence and exaggerated those threats

 

[the moops]

Armchair foreign policy specialists are indeed the most stubborn bunch. So set in what they believe that they can not even stop for a second to think that perhaps they have less than full information. And that the very things they espouse as the correct way to handle things would just as likely #### things up even more

Because our foreign policy has been so wondrously successful over the last 25 years.....

Perhaps things would be a whole lot ####### worse