2016 Presidential Race

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ooh-Rah said:
@Deathy McDeath -

Disagree because that type of headline is irresponsible, - and unlike the NY Post, the LA Times is not supposed to be a tabloid newspaper. To add, the author does not work for the Times, but they publish his writing. I just expect better from a Newspaper of that size.
Click to expand...

Editorial bro. That is what you get. They publish all kinds of shit that represents a wide spectrum of beliefs and issues.
 
The convention is too big of a story to ignore. To that end I sold 4 low mileage goats to a friendly mullah and paid for @pardus to report from Cleveland as events unfold.

hzh8iwbhlc0kzilvxszp.jpg


Godfuckingdammnitsomuch, Pardus....
 
Read this here "Of course, the portrait of an ambitious, church-avoidant, truth-indifferent, judgment-addled, entitled politician who — shall we say — has an expansive definition of traditional marriage sounds a lot like the other candidate in the race. (Trump can claim innocence to the charge of a long career in government.) Before he ran for president, Trump may have even accepted the critique."
 
The past number of months have been very interesting for me politically - I have joked a few times that the board is turning me into a liberal, but in reality it (specifically @TLDR20 and @Deathy McDeath ) have helped me see the more human side of issues when it comes to a number of the hot topics of today. That said, I find I cannot actively support the Democrat side any more than I can the Republican - I'd expect Hillary and her group to call up the Hollywood elite and their ilk, but to bring up as speakers, the mothers of Trayvon Martin and Eric Garner, whose deaths were controversial to say the least, is a slap in the face to the Police Departments who were affected by these deaths. Why not instead bring up and honor the widows of the officers slain over the past months (weeks?).

I'll be so glad when this whole comedy is over and the overt pandering is no longer a televised daily spectacle.

Trayvon Martin's mother and Bill Clinton headline Democratic convention

And Ted Cruz...you are just as bad.

Republican convention boos Cruz as he refuses to endorse Donald Trump
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rick said:
May be reading your post wrong. Do you think Cruz should have endorsed Trump?
Click to expand...

I don't like Trump or Cruz, but Cruz should have put his head down and made a neutral speech about the GOP's platform and not used it as his personal platform. The Republicans are trying to give this thing to Clinton, like they don't have enough problems.
 
Freefalling said:
I don't like Trump or Cruz, but Cruz should have put his head down and made a neutral speech about the GOP's platform and not used it as his personal platform. The Republicans are trying to give this thing to Clinton, like they don't have enough problems.
Click to expand...
Ooh-Rah said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Ehh. Trump did talk sh** about Cruz's wife.
Someone talks about your wife you're obligated to smash them in the mouth, not endorse them as your party's candidate for President.
 
rick said:
Ehh. Trump did talk sh** about Cruz's wife.
Someone talks about your wife you're obligated to smash them in the mouth, not endorse them as your party's candidate for President.
Click to expand...

I don't think he should have endorsed him, but I see your point.
 
rick said:
Ehh. Trump did talk sh** about Cruz's wife.
Someone talks about your wife you're obligated to smash them in the mouth, not endorse them as your party's candidate for President.
Click to expand...
No offense, but C'mon, are you 12? You're gonna assault someone for saying something bad about your spouse? Did it put your spouse in any danger of death or great bodily harm? I would like to think we are a bit smarter than that.

Sorry, I am not gonna ruin my or my family's lives for some antiquated sense of masculinity unless there is a direct threat. They both traded barbs and knew the field they were in. Families should have been left out, but they were not and no one got harmed.
 
rick said:
Ehh. Trump did talk sh** about Cruz's wife.
Someone talks about your wife you're obligated to smash them in the mouth, not endorse them as your party's candidate for President.
Click to expand...

Cruz was being a douche. Cruz claimed it was personal vis-a-vis the attacks in his family, but accepted the invitation and gave a tepid speech and didn't endorse Trump. How is that not personal? He can't have it both ways.

The convention is the big pre-general (election) pep rally, everyone gets on the same sheet of music. If Cruz really thought it was personal and knew he wasn't going to endorse Trump, he never should have accepted the invitation.
 
ke4gde said:
No offense, but C'mon, are you 12? You're gonna assault someone for saying something bad about your spouse? Did it put your spouse in any danger of death or great bodily harm? I would like to think we are a bit smarter than that.

Sorry, I am not gonna ruin my or my family's lives for some antiquated sense of masculinity unless there is a direct threat. They both traded barbs and knew the field they were in. Families should have been left out, but they were not and no one got harmed.
Click to expand...
There's always the one guy on the internet that takes everything literal.

To simplify my position, Trump crossed a line that went beyond a personal attack on Cruz and I don't think he can be faulted for giving Trump the Heisman because of it.

From the Chicago Tribute, "Cruz said. 'I'm not going to get into criticizing or attacking Donald Trump, but I'll give you this response: I am not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father.'"

While I'm not a Cruz fan, that's a fair sentiment and I think if more politicians from both parties were willing to stand behind their convictions like this we'd be in a much better position as a country.
 
rick said:
There's always the one guy on the internet that takes everything literal.
Click to expand...
Nice, how about we learn how to properly convey thoughts and arguments?

On topic, Cruz is behaving like a spoiled child because he did not get his way. Even though he pledged to support the nominee, if he did not want to then he should not have spoken. I don't fault him for being upset about the personal attacks. However, he is a slimeball and showed his colors. It had nothing to do with convictions. Cruz is the epitome of what is wrong with the Republican party.
 
Why don't you two slow your roll a bit. Continue to disagree and debate, but take some of the invective out of your future posts.

ETA: I genuinely like both of you, but take it down a notch.
 
rick said:
From the Chicago Tribute, "Cruz said. 'I'm not going to get into criticizing or attacking Donald Trump, but I'll give you this response: I am not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father.'"

While I'm not a Cruz fan, that's a fair sentiment and I think if more politicians from both parties were willing to stand behind their convictions like this we'd be in a much better position as a country.
Click to expand...

As for the quote from the Trib, his response with his speech was a type of attack, just veiled in a different way. When you give a speech at a convention, you do it for one reason, and that is to support/endorse the candidate. If he really wanted to rise above it, when he received the invite, he should have just said, "no, thanks."

As for your assessment, I completely concur.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Question Question
crossroads/mid life crisis
Replies
5
Views
517
Muppet
Muppet
R.Caerbannog
Economic shifts in Central America and China
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
R.Caerbannog
R.Caerbannog
Marauder06
"Selfie Culture"
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
AWP
AWP
Marauder06
Team Rubicon
Replies
7
Views
887
x SF med
x SF med
Blizzard
New Officers: Are We Getting Our Best and Brightest?
Replies
9
Views
961
Devildoc
Devildoc
Back
Top