It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Ben Carson: 2016 election may not happen

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 09:27 AM

originally posted by: FlyersFan
That being said - I"m going over my prep'd supplies and making sure we can hold up for a three month quarantine ... just in case.

I agree completely. This is not a new possibility. I remember REALLY thinking that old Georgie was working on a third term... I feel so silly! LOL

And yes, being prepared for ANY "possibility" is a great idea. (Of COURSE, it's a possibility! It's a possibility that Obama is an alien come to take over the world! Is this Ben Carson's next fear-mongering "possibility"???)

originally posted by: sheepslayer247
Ben Carson does seem to say some pretty dumb things, but I suppose we all have a tendency to do the same.

Yeah, but I'm not running for president. Are you? I'd vote for you!

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 09:34 AM
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Yeah, but I'm not running for president. Are you? I'd vote for you!

Unfortunately, no.

You actually think they'd let me put my name on a ballot?

Well, if I publicly stated that Obama is a Kenyan Muslim communist......I may have a shot.

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 09:56 AM
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

According to Sgt Major Dan Page the US Marine Corp was given the 29 palm survey given by the United Nations Combat Survey Team Asked by President George W Bush If he issued a Presidential Executive order would you be willing to shoot Americans who refused to surrender there guns 75% said No, apparently Bush was livid and this IMO is the only reason why he still isn't in office today.

Here is the video and he speaks about the survey at the 1:00:25 mark

He was one of the officers involved in the Ferguson protests and he retired because of this video. The left right republican democrat makes no difference in the corporate run government we have because of every president we have had since Nixon, this has been there goal all along. Jimmy Carter wasn't apart of this IMO hence why he is so demonized.

Here is a copy of the 29 palms survey and scroll down to the last question and see for yourself:
edit on 1-10-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-10-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-10-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 11:34 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
apparently Bush was livid and this IMO is the only reason why he still isn't in office today.

Naaaah I'm not buying his story. Bush43 isn't in office today because his term was up and, according to the law of the land, he had to leave. He also had a very low approval rating and he obviously had some kind of breakdown during his second term so he probably didn't want to stay anyways.

The reason Obama will be out of office is also because his term will be up and, according to the law of the land, he will have to leave. (and honestly, since the first month he's been in he hasn't looked happy to be there so I doubt he'd want to stay past what the law allows anyways).

Obama won't overstay past his 8 years just as Bush didn't overstay past HIS 8 years.

For the past 20 years people have been screaming that whoever is in office will try to stay longer than they are elected. They screamed it about Bush41 ... about Clinton ... About Bush43 ... and now about Obama. Truth is, those people probably wanted no part of staying longer than they had to and they couldn't even if they wanted to.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 04:48 PM
a reply to: snarky412

"I believe it's ridiculous as well
There would be total uprising from ALL peoples in a SHTF scenario such as this--or at least I hope there would be"

All Carson is doing is throwing chunks of red meat to the ravenous horde of the right wing fringe.

He himself surely doesn't believe it; but he sure knows how to light the fires of the pitchfork villagers.

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 04:58 PM
a reply to: charles1952

Hello Charles,

"There is nothing absurd or ridiculous about that statement. The potential does exist. I'll agree that it's not likely, but he's certainly not claiming it will happen.
As with other posters, at this moment, he's got me far more impressed than any other person mentioned as a possible candidate."

To warn of a threat potential that is unreasonable is fear mongering and inflammatory. Is there a reasonable potential for the sun exploding in a super nova tomorrow?

It was irresponsible and it was a carefully crafted dog whistle.

Like you, I am greatly impressed by Dr. Carson, but not the way you are.

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 05:04 PM
a reply to: Diderot

All Carson is doing is throwing chunks of red meat to the ravenous horde of the right wing fringe.

Then there's nothing to worry about is there.

But Carson sure does hit nerves doesn't he.

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 07:16 PM

originally posted by: xuenchen
If they can't contain and control the coming massive financial collapse, this could happen.

The current political atmosphere is possibly the worst in history.

Corruption and wild jealousy runs rampant at the highest level in history.

All in power are trembling at the very thought of losing power.

The U.S. is at the most dangerous point in history.

Sounds like you’re describing the time before the war of aggression against the south. Lincoln was the living example of a true tyrant along with his scorch and burn generals more like Stalin and Moa than the fictitious image that the cult of Lincoln has hoisted upon public education since the turn of the last century.

posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 08:34 PM
One of the biggest draws that I have to Dr. Carson is that he ISN'T a lawyer or a political insider.

He has worked.
He struggled, he grew up poor, and he made something of himself.
He's a skilled surgeon, a great leader.

I'd be honored and proud to have him be a representative of the US.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 06:28 AM
a reply to: beezzer

The problem I have with Ben Carson is that he talks just like the rest of them. He uses the same rhetoric and buzzwords that we hear from the establishment boobs already in office.

To me, if we want leadership that can actually bring the change we want...we have to start with the way they talk.

Carson using the word socialism and making references to soviet commies tells me that either he is using these terms to draw in the Right's attention, or he has no clue as to what he's talking about.

In the end, he is no different than what we already have in place.

edit on 10/2/2014 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 06:38 AM
a reply to: sheepslayer247

You're more than welcome to your opinion.

I think he's saying what he's saying, not to gain any support, but because that's the way he sees it.

He doesn't need to run for office. He's never had political ambitions before.

I think he's speaking more honestly and frankly than any "politician" in decades.

And personally, with words like socialism, the definition has been so "adjusted" "rewritten" "corrected" "PC'd" that whatever you want to call it, he's against it and that is good enough for me.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 02:21 PM
First of all, it takes 3/4 of the states to vote to repeal an amendment to the constitution. To get 3/4 of the states to agree is hard enough -- let alone have them do it as quickly as two years. The ratification of another amendment would be required to repeal the 22nd amendment, and ratification of amendments usually take many years. By the way, in the history of the U.S., only one constitutional amendment was ever repealed -- that was the 19th amendment (prohibition). It was repealed by the 21st amendment.

Secondly, I can't imagine that 3/4 of the states will approve any such amendment that includes the sitting president (no matter who that president is). These things usually come with a provision that they don't take affect until several year sin the future. In this case, I think such an amendment would have a clause saying it would not take effect for 10 years -- which means the sitting president who was in office when the 22nd amendment was repealed would not be able to run for a third consecutive term, although he or she would be able to eventually seek a third term.

This idea of waiting 10 years (or more) before it takes effect would be so it is clear that it is not being done for the benefit of any one person who happens to be President at the time -- but rather being done for the Office of the Presidency itself.

edit on 10/2/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 06:35 PM
a reply to: xuenchen

"But Carson sure does hit nerves doesn't he."

He's too smart not to hit what he aims for.

posted on Oct, 11 2014 @ 01:51 AM
a reply to: sheepslayer247

Dear sheepslayer247,

Thank you, after all this time, the question your post raised in my mind has finally come to the surface.

Changing the way a politician talks is the easiest thing in the world. Simply tell him that the audience for this speech will respond to a folksy accent, or big words, or attacks on either Capitalism or Socialism, depending. Changing their words is nothing.

If the people in Washington now are all boobs, haven't you committed to voting third party? You certainly can't vote for Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, John Boehner, or anyone else similarly situated.

I will rest well tonight if you tell me you're going to give your vote to the Central Nebraska, Free Love, Drug, and Booze Party. Their candidate, from the rumors I've heard, will be Miss Daisy Sunflower, and her running mate will be Phoenix Starchild. Now, those two speak differently. Sometimes they don't complete their sentences, but all of the Washington boobs do, so we're on the right path. (The more I think about it, the more I'm tempted to go down to their campaign HQ.)

I would think their thoughts and intentions would be more important than their words. I've heard that Obama is a brilliant speaker (I have trouble listening to him myself), but that didn't guarantee he would do a good job for the country.

Carson uses words like Socialism? So does just about everyone on ATS at some point or another. Russians? Certainly the Russians are a concern, Ukraine is (or, rather was) on everybody's lips.

It seems to early to condemn him.

With respect,
edit on 11-10-2014 by charles1952 because: punctuation

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in