Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 12, 2016, 07:07:41 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 445
76  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Your last meal on death row on: January 19, 2016, 10:23:04 pm
Kiera Knightly
77  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Do you have ADD/ADHD? on: January 19, 2016, 10:01:59 pm
yes. classic case of the latter
78  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: ARG-NH: Trump 27, Kasich 20, Rubio 10 on: January 19, 2016, 09:45:41 pm
79  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Cruz: Iowa is run by Crony-Capitalist Corn Cartels that are not Conservative on: January 19, 2016, 09:38:33 pm
this ^^^^^^
80  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump's chances of winning the nomination on: January 19, 2016, 09:29:13 pm
Around 40% right now, but it goes up to 60% 75% if he wins Iowa.
81  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Carly Fiorinas outrageous sexist attack on Hillary Clinton is the worst yet on: January 19, 2016, 09:11:03 pm
People, it's Carly freaking Fiorina. Who cares? The only remaining mystery is whether she drops out right after NH or IA.
82  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rand Paul web ad is...very...strange on: January 19, 2016, 09:02:27 pm
what the actual f**k
83  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who will win Iowa?- Less than 2 weeks to go on: January 19, 2016, 08:56:04 pm
I think Branstad's denunciation of Cruz will flip more votes than Palin's endorsement of Trump.

That said, my biggest doubt for Trump is his ground game to GOTV. Until i see some firm indication his campaign has joined the grown up table in that regard, I'm doubtful of The Donald actually pulling it off.
84  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump/Santorum? on: January 19, 2016, 08:31:48 pm
no effing way
85  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why didn't the GOP pick Buchanan in 1996? on: January 18, 2016, 09:46:39 am
The GOP didn't want to win or even compete in 1996. It was better for business if they loss. Hence why good candidates like Pete Wilson, Lamar Alexander, etc, were ignored and at least somewhat competitive candidates like Buchanan (his best shot would have been in 1992 if he could have taken out Bush) we're totally maligned. It is well documented that Alan Keyes ran as a stalking horse to take down Buchanan in the primaries to make sure he didn't threaten Dole.
They wanted to lose in 1996?
Yeah, it was better for business. They could complain for four years and get the guy they really wanted (Dubya) into the White House. Dole was a lamb sent to the slaughter.

Nonsense . after the breathtaking wave in 94 most people reasonably thought Clinton was a dead duck. By the time it became apparent he was going to be re-elected the GOP primaries were already in full swing. Most Republicans didn't write Dole off until sometime in early-mid 96 when he was already the presumptive nominee.
86  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: KY Gov. Matt Bevin to Overhaul Medicaid and Scrap Kynect on: January 18, 2016, 09:41:59 am
excellent. cut the drug of government welfare before the dependency is irremovable.

"Let them die!!!" is pretty much what you are saying.

No, no noo. He's saying that instead of social programs, write them a prescription for bootstraps.

Haha oh yes the good old bootstraps the Republicans talk about. It's all an act so they can deny more and more people health care coverage.

Youngconservative's post would be slightly less anemic if he himself wasn't comfortably covered by his daddy's health insurance plan.
87  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: BREAKING: Justice Roy Moore orders AL Probate judges to not issue SSM licenses on: January 14, 2016, 08:48:28 pm
how does this asshat keep getting sent back to the bench?

Alabama. Next question?
88  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why didn't the GOP pick Buchanan in 1996? on: January 14, 2016, 08:42:16 pm
Different time, and. Buchanan could never seem more moderate than he was, a necessary trait of every successful conservative candidate. Plus having the charisma of a garden slug didn't help....
89  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Super Awkward Cruz Ad on: January 14, 2016, 08:15:34 pm
Oh wow.
What a strange political ad.
How on Earth can that ad convince people to support Cruz (or any candidate, for that matter) ??
Now I'm starting to question if Iowans are human .... as that ad could only possibly be persuasive to aliens from Pluto.
(Is it actually airing in Iowa ? New Hampshire ? Both ?)

I doubt it is airing anywhere but on the Internet.  It is too long for your typical :30 TV ad and doesn't have the candidate formally approving the message.

You and most Atlas posters aren't the audience for this supposedly terrible ad, anyway.  I suspect very few Atlas posters are evangelicals or watch Duck Dynasty.

Cinyc is on a roll here. Smiley
90  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Super Awkward Cruz Ad on: January 14, 2016, 08:14:38 pm
This strategy worked great for David Vitter.

There is a heck of a lot of difference between employing the Robertsons to help Cruz win a Republican caucus and to help a very flawed candidate win a general election.  The endorsement can't hurt with evangelicals in Iowa - which is who this ad is directed at.

correct answer
91  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: Would you rather live in Arizona or Denmark? on: January 13, 2016, 10:25:23 am
While Arizona does have a lot of natural beauty, What's the point if it is too friggin hot to go outside and look at it?

Heat? Aren't you from Texas ? Tongue
92  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: Opinion of David Bowie on: January 13, 2016, 10:08:48 am
I'm going to out on a limb public opinion-wise and say he was somewhat overrated, but even then a definite FF. He damn near invented, or at least defined,  glam rock
93  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Opinion of _________s band names on: January 12, 2016, 04:31:23 pm
Ugh. Horrible names.


Don't you have an entire BOARD at the other Atlas to attention whore with?
94  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Where would you rather live? on: January 12, 2016, 03:55:12 pm
Unless you're an idiot, all this really comes down to is weather you prefer Des Moines or NYC. I;m going with NYC.

This. ^ That said, i'd like to know some examples of 80% Obama precincts in Des Moines. I get two VERY different images in my head of what that could be like ......
95  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump winning IA and NH on: January 12, 2016, 03:29:33 pm
Hard to see how Trump is stopped after winning the first two contests.
Cruz may have made it close in Iowa but will have poor numbers in NH and be dismissed as a one-state pony.
None of the establishment candidates will have come close.
Trump would get extremely favorable media coverage and tons of momentum, certainly win the next two states, and his national numbers would jump up to the 50s.

Basically this. while Trump still his problems is head to head matchups, remaining at best competative, there's still the question of who the anti-trump will be.
96  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2008 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Missouri---Did Nader Do It Again? on: January 06, 2016, 02:12:07 pm
I just realized that Nader's 2008 MO total of about 17K was several times that of McCain's approx. 4k margin. Factor all the wouldn't have turned out/fundimentally anti-Obama voters among that lot, and it's still difficult to see how Obama loses MO without Nader on the ballot.

Thoughts? Anyone disagree?

Actually , Nader's statewide total was more than McCain's margin AND the Libertarian statewide vote combined. Fwiw.
97  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Which word do you typically use for carbonated soft drinks? on: January 03, 2016, 05:59:05 am
Pop (ubiquitous Ohio).

I remeber a couple times my dad ordering in Florida a rum and coke, only to get a rum with Pepsi. Urg! we were v ery much a Coke household. at least one time the waiter said when told he'd ordered a rum and coke rather than ruma and Pepsi  "same thing". Roll Eyes
98  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Does Ted Cruz have all the power? on: January 02, 2016, 10:16:06 pm
If Cruz loses Iowa or loses overall, he has another 4 years to run again. He's young enough.
He will be primaried in 2018

By who? An establishment challenge would be a disaster in Texas and there is no room to Cruz's right.
Cruz was only able to win in 2012 because of the liberty wing. Cruz is becoming increasingly more mainstream. That will not resonate with all Texans back home.

That huge and powerful Liberty wing. Huh??

There are TENS of them!!!

Seriously. Dead Prez, PLEASE quit with the Paultard hackery. It's embarrassing.
99  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who'll win IA and NH on the republican side? on: January 02, 2016, 08:38:03 pm
100  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Santorum says electing Cruz will lead to "Polygamy" on: January 02, 2016, 08:23:23 pm
Why is it trolling to post support for what Santorum said?  I think a lot of people here agree with it.
Cruz and Santorum have both given EXCELLENT interviews on this subject.  Santorum talked about it with Rachel Maddow some months back.  It's about tradition and the definition and purpose of marriage.

So tradition and religion supersede people's rights?

I'm not here to comment on gay issues or whatever, but yes, tradition and religion do supersede people's rights. We've known this for some time. Next, you'll be asking if the government can also trample people's rights. The answer, again, will be yes.

What exactly do you mean by "people's rights" here? Surrounding the precise definition of that term, follows almost everything. Of is this merely an observation that the government almost inherently has the power potentially to trample over matters, in a way that is disturbing to the good conscience. If so, who knew?

I wasn't the one who originally deployed the term "people's rights". In any case, in the practical sense, obviously government has the ability to do what it likes. In the philosophical sense, obviously, rights would have to be defined, but I've stopped prioritizing individual rights as such a necessary foundation of government, especially when it's obvious that the state's natural role is the maintenance and strengthening of the state. My comment doesn't have anything to deal specifically with gay rights, but the obsession with the individual is an obvious threat to state superiority. Furthermore, I find rights obsession from a secular point of view slightly humorous. Were he to rephrase it as, say, "it is conducive to the running of a free and well-ordered state that religion be kept outside of the realm of the government", I'd be more accepting of his argument, though I'd have disputes with it. On another point, I've come to believe that well-integrated, tight-knit communities are preferable to the atomized, impersonal, and materialistic nature of the society "libertarians" would carve out for us--from a security and public policy perspective. As such, while individual rights might be--in theory--a good foundation for government, it's brought nations like the United States to the brink of disaster.

Also, if we wanna talk about "tradition and religion" superseding people's rights, wouldn't it be incumbent on us, as an allegedly free country, to topple those governments and even those social frameworks, that undermine human rights? While that might sound appealing, we've seen what trying to do that to even one government can do to this country. Moreover, supplanting a people's tradition and religion can lead to something akin to social collapse. For a semi-relevant, though not the best, example, the collapse of the Soviet Union has, in ways, led to the spread of alcoholism and empty consumerism in Russia.

I wasn't advocating we supplant a person's religion or tradition all I am saying don't use that to tell me  or anyone else how we can live our lives if it harms none or violates a natural law.

Example: My faith says drinking is forbidden I would never tell anyone you can't drink because my faith says you can't.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but once you get past the basics, "natural law" becomes a bit murky. I mean, maybe there's a list of natural laws out there I'm unaware of, but once you've covered the basics of property (controversial per the socialists), life (controversial per capital punishment and abortion), and worship (which runs into its own difficulties due to the intersection between religion and a host of other fields), it's up to policy makers' creativity to find a basis for legislation within "natural law". Logical requirements of the state--war-making, education, the issue of promoting one's nation above others or at least making it equal to others--surely fall outside the bounds of moral/legal code developed (at least) hundreds of years ago. In fact, the most expedient ways to address those and other issues will likely involve, to at least a small extent, violating the basics of free living, trade, and worship. Fact is, government is going to make a number of arbitrary, if not outright immoral (again, a shaky term outside the bounds of an organized and absolutist belief system) actions. And yes, this will involve trampling people's alleged rights.

Example: U.S. Interstate Highways. In urban areas such as Detroit, highways ended up intersecting "ghetto" and heavily African-American areas since those areas would always be cheapest. What ended up happening was subjecting a number of people to be at points continually on the move. How do you fix that? Have the government choose the more expensive areas to build in, pissing away taxpayer money? Implement government regulations to control (I guess even more than already happens?) property prices so things are less unfair? Wrench the system from top to bottom to correct for racism entirely?

you really need to stop posting until college is over and you reuinite with the real world, dude. Tongue
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 445

Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines