What's new
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!

Official 2016 GOP thread: Is it really going to be Donald Trump?? (2 Viewers)

I agree with you about the IRS.

I don't know about the Department of Education.

Can you explain to me what it does? It is a budget line item of $70.7 bln. Is there any way education in the US would be worse off if that expenditure was cut in half, but the $35 bln remaining was just directly distributed to the states pro-rata based on the number of students in each state?
To be fair, at least 25 of the 70 is federal discretionary Pell Grants. Out of the remaining 45, 12 is funneled to the states for special education and another 16 is sent to the states for disadvantaged schools.  It's all well an good to say there's a lot of fat there, but of the budget goes straight out the door to the states or Pell Grant recipients. 

 
I agree with you about the IRS.

I don't know about the Department of Education.

Can you explain to me what it does? It is a budget line item of $70.7 bln. Is there any way education in the US would be worse off if that expenditure was cut in half, but the $35 bln remaining was just directly distributed to the states pro-rata based on the number of students in each state?
I honestly don't know enough about the Department of Education to know how well run it is (if that's your question).  I do know we have several federal/state funded 'schools of choice' that we are very fond of here in my area.  When I hear "get rid of the Department of Education" my initial thought is that would include the funds that they provide to the states.  I'd be happy to entertain the states being in control of their funds, but I think too that if the federal government is passing out monies, they need to be able to determine if the funds are being used appropriately and not just being thrown into a money pit of sorts.

 
I went today and early voted in Florida. I voted my conscience and who I feel is the best candidate for the GOP.

John Kasich.

I realize it will be wasted. But I refuse to vote for any other GOP candidate. What a horrible ticket we have this go around. Such a shame. Fellow moderate (middle) Republicans.....we will once again lose a chance to get back into White House.

Simple as that IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Comparing Ted Cruz and Donald Trump is silly.  It's like comparing a pie filled with #### to one that could be filled with anything from arsenic to rusty nails to #### to nothing at all.  You don't have any idea how they taste compared to one another, you just know you don't want either of them.
This makes me want to open a facebook account just so I can repost it.

 
Comparing Ted Cruz and Donald Trump is silly.  It's like comparing a pie filled with #### to one that could be filled with anything from arsenic to rusty nails to #### to nothing at all.  You don't have any idea how they taste compared to one another, you just know you don't want either of them.
Trump pie is delicious, it really has tremendous flavor and everyone likes it. Trust me you should try it you will love it. 

 
Creepy Cruz is gonna catch him I think.  I have a funny feeling the Zodiac is gonna have the most delegates going into that convention.  No facts, just a gut instinct.

-QG

 
What a downfall for both of them. Pathetic. 
Yeah it is so sad. But hopefully....it works. If Trump loses Florida that will be a big blow. But I expect him to end up winning it. Once you get north of Palm Beach County it is the deep south and basically Southern Georgia. So Cruz may have an outside shot.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I honestly don't know enough about the Department of Education to know how well run it is (if that's your question).  I do know we have several federal/state funded 'schools of choice' that we are very fond of here in my area.  When I hear "get rid of the Department of Education" my initial thought is that would include the funds that they provide to the states.  I'd be happy to entertain the states being in control of their funds, but I think too that if the federal government is passing out monies, they need to be able to determine if the funds are being used appropriately and not just being thrown into a money pit of sorts.
Because the Federal government is so good at identifying and avoiding money pits?

 
Yeah it is so sad. But hopefully....it works. If Trump loses Florida that will be a big blow. But I expect him to end up winning it. Once you get north of Palm Beach County it is the deep south and basically Southern Georgia. So Cruz may have an outside shot.
So I just heard that Romney is campaigning for Rubio in Florida and Cruz in Ohio. The deceit of the old republicans is astonishing. 

 
To be fair, at least 25 of the 70 is federal discretionary Pell Grants. Out of the remaining 45, 12 is funneled to the states for special education and another 16 is sent to the states for disadvantaged schools.  It's all well an good to say there's a lot of fat there, but of the budget goes straight out the door to the states or Pell Grant recipients. 
That is the kind of detail I wasn't aware of. 

So, based on the numbers you just gave, is the $17+ billion that is being spent at the Dept of Education (setting aside what is being just redistributed to the states) delivering any net benefit?

I realize that is a hard question and don't expect to get to a good answer on a message board. I also realize that $17 billion is a lot of money, but isn't #### compared to the Federal budget. And that's the problem. But true proponents of smaller and better Federal government would ask these questions about every department and line item. Of course none of those exist in this race, on either side.

 
That is the kind of detail I wasn't aware of. 

So, based on the numbers you just gave, is the $17+ billion that is being spent at the Dept of Education (setting aside what is being just redistributed to the states) delivering any net benefit?

I realize that is a hard question and don't expect to get to a good answer on a message board. I also realize that $17 billion is a lot of money, but isn't #### compared to the Federal budget. And that's the problem. But true proponents of smaller and better Federal government would ask these questions about every department and line item. Of course none of those exist in this race, on either side.
Take a look...I'm sure there's some built in fat administering where the money goes, but frankly the vast majority is already funneled to the states in some manner. 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget17/17pbapt.pdf

 
Because the Federal government is so good at identifying and avoiding money pits?
Because they need to be responsible for the money they are doling out.  It's be nice if we (the electorate) actually held these yahoos accountable rather than settling for their lame excuses for why they can't do something.

 
To be fair, at least 25 of the 70 is federal discretionary Pell Grants. Out of the remaining 45, 12 is funneled to the states for special education and another 16 is sent to the states for disadvantaged schools.  It's all well an good to say there's a lot of fat there, but of the budget goes straight out the door to the states or Pell Grant recipients. 
That is the kind of detail I wasn't aware of. 

So, based on the numbers you just gave, is the $17+ billion that is being spent at the Dept of Education (setting aside what is being just redistributed to the states) delivering any net benefit?

I realize that is a hard question and don't expect to get to a good answer on a message board. I also realize that $17 billion is a lot of money, but isn't #### compared to the Federal budget. And that's the problem. But true proponents of smaller and better Federal government would ask these questions about every department and line item. Of course none of those exist in this race, on either side.
FWIW...I'm generally with you.  I just am not aware of how inefficient the DoE is/isn't so I don't know if cutting it all together is a good/bad idea.  Right or wrong, I considered the source (Cruz) when I made my initial comment.  I'm not sure he's a good decision maker, so I started out assuming it was a bad idea.

 
Political scientists are going to make a lot of money writing about this whole fiasco for years to come.
Two sentences..

Trump runs as a GOP,  Republicans think he is a joke so ignore him.

Trump's :bs: is bought by many, he takes the lead in delegates, leaving the GOP in shock..

The End.

 
You mean Kasich in Ohio. And there's no deceit; Romney has been very open about his strategy. 
:fishing:   Yes Tim you are so wise. There is nothing dishonest about telling half the people Kasich is the best candidate and the other half that Rubio is the best candidate, as long as you announce that you are going to lie ahead of time.

 
:fishing:   Yes Tim you are so wise. There is nothing dishonest about telling half the people Kasich is the best candidate and the other half that Rubio is the best candidate, as long as you announce that you are going to lie ahead of time.
Have you listened to the calls? He doesn't say a word about Rubio or Kasich, other than mentioning who he'd like them to vote for as an alternative to Trump. The entire call is about Trump's flaws. 

 
Current implied odds of each candidate winning, using odds at Oddschecker:

Code:
Clinton	64.0%
Trump	21.3%
Cruz	4.6%
Sanders	4.2%
Kasich	3.1%
Rubio	2.8%
	
Dem	68.2%
Rep	31.8%
 
This actually makes total sense when you imagine Tim as Navin Johnson.

Have you listened to the calls? He doesn't say a word about Rubio or Kasich, other than mentioning who he'd like them to vote for as an alternative to Trump. The entire call is about Trump's flaws.
 
bolzano said:
What's everyone's thought on tonight? Given the late momentum that Cruz had in Louisiana, I think that he can upset Trump in Mississippi. Moreover, he was endorsed by Gov. Bryant yesterday. Also, I think Cruz has a chance of winning in Idaho, since it's a caucus state and leans libertarian. I'm hoping Kasich can come from behind in Michigan, as some of the recent polls show home closing well. Hawaii is interesting... Maybe Rubio there?
wrong on Cruz, wrong on it being a caucus state, and wrong on it being lib.   Cruz could win, but he was 3rd in the polls about 10 days ago.  TV ads here have been 10-1 Rubio ads over Cruz. No Trump or Kasich ads.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bolzano said:
My bad. The Democrats are running a caucus, whereas the GOP's is a primary. As for Idaho's political leanings, I always thought that the Mountain West had a libertarian streak.
Idaho is White Supremacist Militia country

 
Cruz'people in Hawaii spreading the rumor that Rubio has dropped out. Cruz denies any knowledge. 

Unbelievable that they're pulling this #### again. 

 
Cruz'people in Hawaii spreading the rumor that Rubio has dropped out. Cruz denies any knowledge. 

Unbelievable that they're pulling this #### again. 
I tell you Tim, I will stay home on Election Day and help give Hilliary the presidency if Cruz gets the GOP nomination. This guy is bad news. 

 
I like how Cruz and his supporters are hiding behind "CNN is reporting...". Because you know if they said "FoxNews is reporting... then no one would believe them. :lol:

 
bolzano said:
What do y'all think about today/ tonight? Given the late momentum that Cruz had in Louisiana, I think that he can upset Trump in Mississippi. Moreover, he was endorsed by Gov. Bryant yesterday. Also, I think Cruz has a chance of winning in Idaho, since it's a caucus state and leans libertarian. I'm hoping Kasich can come from behind in Michigan, as some of the recent polls show him closing well. Hawaii is interesting... Maybe Rubio there?
He could win there.  I used to live there and my wife is from there, in laws still live there.  I don't know if you followed the Thad Cochran primary last year against Chris McDaniel?  McDaniel is a "Cruz lite" to me.  He rails on the state Republican party all the time and not many people in that "establishment" like him.  McDaniel has backed Cruz there but has for the most part not said a lot negative about Trump at this time.  If Cruz is going to win you need to watch Forest and Jones counties in southeast MS around Hattiesburg and Laurel.  That is McDaniel's home base and if he helps Cruz it will be there.  It took Cochran the entire rest of the state to overcome the margins that McDaniel ran up there in the runoff.

 
As for Idaho, I think that is a strong Cruz possibility tonight.  It's not as much Trump territory as a NV, AZ, or even NM would be I would think.  I think as far as the western states go, it may be the best opportunity for Cruz.  

 
I think Cruz gets Idaho and Trump gets the other three states. But I am betting on Cruz and Rubio canceling each other out in HI. If that doesn't happen,it will be a 2/2 night for Trump/Cruz

 
How long has Trump been trying to throw this campaign?
The real question is how much money is he willing to sink into this run. Sure he's still getting free airtime but it's all hugely negative at this point.  At some point he's going to have to pony up and I don't think he'll be willing to outspend the tea party and the establishment. 

 
He seems to be the only person who actually likes Cruz.
Cruz is rock solid on the issues. If you're a conservative he's hard to beat. But the guy comes off very unlikeable, he's got a really creepy smirk on his face all the time and speaks as if he knows he's way smarter than you. 

 
But what people don't seem to get is that, as awful as Cruz would be, he will act within the rules. I don't trust Trump to do that. 
I don't see any difference between them in this regard. They will both act within their own interpretations of the rules. And in both cases, their own interpretations will differ from those of experts outside their administrations.

 
The real question is how much money is he willing to sink into this run. Sure he's still getting free airtime but it's all hugely negative at this point.  At some point he's going to have to pony up and I don't think he'll be willing to outspend the tea party and the establishment. 
It's possible that he could make money from his campaign rather than sinking money into it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top