Correct me if I’m wrong, but the dems have the House, the Senate, & the Presidency. Why in the the hell are they responding to Biden’s speech?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not just one. The congressional black caucus is giving one and the “squad” are giving oneCorrect me if I’m wrong, but the dems have the House, the Senate, & the Presidency. Why in the the hell are they responding to Biden’s speech?
Same guy that beat your orange jesus in a landslide??They need a “response” because no one will be listening to the talking vegetable in the WH
You can have them.What we need as a country are more Romneys, Manchins, Cheneys, Kenzingers, etc... Not less of them.
Don't know that I agree with your last sentence completely. There is a lot of baggage there. I finally woke up that a few years ago.This is the exact kind of horse shit I posted in another thread about... The middle is shrinking fast and reasonable adults are going the way of the dinosaur, while the fringes of both parties pick up steam.
If that trend continues, 20 years from now we will be alternating between voting for white supremacist authoritarians (assuming they still let us vote) and socialist hippies who went to "free" (government subsidized) college.
What we need as a country are more Romneys, Manchins, Cheneys, Kenzingers, etc... Not less of them.
We need more politicians that run on one set of principles and govern on a different set? Manchin is the only one you listed that has been consistent.This is the exact kind of horse shit I posted in another thread about... The middle is shrinking fast and reasonable adults are going the way of the dinosaur, while the fringes of both parties pick up steam.
If that trend continues, 20 years from now we will be alternating between voting for white supremacist authoritarians (assuming they still let us vote) and socialist hippies who went to "free" (government subsidized) college.
What we need as a country are more Romneys, Manchins, Cheneys, Kenzingers, etc... Not less of them.
By "woke up" do you mean -- shifted your ideals further to the right? Because that is exactly what I'm talking about.Don't know that I agree with your last sentence completely. There is a lot of baggage there. I finally woke up that a few years ago.
Not necessarily. But, look at the Cheney's and I used to walk the line, Dick Cheney Sec of Defense and VP. But, looking back at Iraq and Afghanistan and some of that I am like well, did we do all that correctly? Romney caved and ran a terrible campaign against Obama, he could have really won that one. He is just a cave in artist. I want to like Manchin but he flops around a lot historically. Recently he has held up against his own party which is good to see.By "woke up" do you mean -- shifted your ideals further to the right? Because that is exactly what I'm talking about.
The more people that run to the ends of the spectrum, the shittier our country is going to be. And I mean that on both ends... If you have gone from a Reagan republican to a Marjorie Taylor Green, Lauren Brobert-esque Republican you are just as much a part of the problem as those that have gone from being Clinton democrats to AOC, Bernie Sanders Democrats.
You need to give Romney more credit. Obama was a MUCH tougher opponent than Hillary.Romney caved and ran a terrible campaign against Obama, he could have really won that one.
The left ran adds implicating Romney in the death of a man's wife. Then Senate leader Harry Reid admitted to having no regrets about straight up lying about Romney's taxes - Reid later went on to call Romney admirable & "a very fine human being."You need to give Romney more credit. Obama was a MUCH tougher opponent than Hillary.
Romney lost due, in part, to the right's obsession on killing Obamacare. They have never figured out that, until a reasonable replacement is offered, US voters will support that program.
Plus, there was his position, which was also the republican position, on the US auto industry during the great recession. Lots of jobs tied either directly or indirectly with that sector....and it's resurrection under the Obama administration was seen as a success.
I can tell you from first hand experience that Romney took a disaster in waiting that was the 2002 Winter Olympics and turned it into a resounding success. I don't agree with him on everything, but I don't doubt his ability to lead and govern.
Yes I remember that. It was the only dirty trick ever in the history of politics. Also, it was shocking to see a politician flip-flop on an earlier position.The left ran adds implicating Romney in the death of a man's wife. Then Senate leader Harry Reid admitted to having no regrets about straight up lying about Romney's taxes - Reid later went on to call Romney admirable & "a very fine human being."
Dirty trick? They painted Romney as a morally corrupt & indifferent killer.Yes I remember that. It was the only dirty trick ever in the history of politics. Also, it was shocking to see a politician flip-flop on an earlier position.
In other news, water is wet and the pope is still catholic.
Forgive Chevy. He's not capable of understanding such nuance/details.Dirty trick? They painted Romney as a morally corrupt & indifferent killer.
He wouldn't attack Obama. He wouldn't go after him. Obama hammered him with negative ads and played the class warfare things and Romney just sat back and took it. He was leading going into it and rolled over. People like Romney are why Trump cam into play.You need to give Romney more credit. Obama was a MUCH tougher opponent than Hillary.
Romney lost due, in part, to the right's obsession on killing Obamacare. They have never figured out that, until a reasonable replacement is offered, US voters will support that program.
Plus, there was his position, which was also the republican position, on the US auto industry during the great recession. Lots of jobs tied either directly or indirectly with that sector....and it's resurrection under the Obama administration was seen as a success.
I can tell you from first hand experience that Romney took a disaster in waiting that was the 2002 Winter Olympics and turned it into a resounding success. I don't agree with him on everything, but I don't doubt his ability to lead and govern.
Your orange Jesus came into play because there were enough idiots like you to vote for an idiot like him. Oath breaker.He wouldn't attack Obama. He wouldn't go after him. Obama hammered him with negative ads and played the class warfare things and Romney just sat back and took it. He was leading going into it and rolled over. People like Romney are why Trump cam into play.
C'mon...I don't disagree it was shitty, but i don't see it as the big reason he lost.Forgive Chevy. He's not capable of understanding such nuance/details.
Fair pointsHe wouldn't attack Obama. He wouldn't go after him. Obama hammered him with negative ads and played the class warfare things and Romney just sat back and took it. He was leading going into it and rolled over. People like Romney are why Trump cam into play.
And the democrats have never been very good political strategists... Since JFK they have had two "home run" candidates in Bill Clinton and Obama. The rest have been underwhelming at best (and yes Im including Biden).Trump's victory was greatly assisted by the absolutely terrible candidate served up by the Dems.
Look at what we have done with Mush. I should have put a copywrite on that one.And the democrats have never been very good political strategists... Since JFK they have had two "home run" candidates in Bill Clinton and Obama. The rest have been underwhelming at best (and yes Im including Biden).
Republicans always do better with their messaging, branding, campaigning, etc... Hell, you can make a very good argument (and some top political science minds in this country have) that "Make America Great Again" and the related merchandising, etc pushed Trump to his 2016 win.