It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

CNN: GOP Debate

page: 10
12
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   




posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 12:30 AM
link   
I haven't seen at least Hillary demanding to send troops to Syria. A vote for the GOP is a vote for the war party.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: TaleDawn
I haven't seen at least Hillary demanding to send troops to Syria. A vote for the GOP is a vote for the war party.


It's kind of always been that way...Regan's military build up during the cold War, Bush Sr. with Gulf War I ... Bush Jr. with Gulf War II.

Now I know Clinton had the Balkans thing and a few smaller skirmishes here and there, but nothing like what the past presidents coming out of the GOP. And Obama could have done more to reduce forces...but if he did he'd be blamed for what happens, as he would get blamed now for not doing enough. LOL Damned if he did, damned if he didn't.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 01:03 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Exactly, which makes me worry of the GOP more then Hillary, yes Hillary is a war monger, but not to a point where we had seen tonight at the GOP debate.

Seriously why does the GOP want a war with Cuba? and lol Saudis are moderates.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 01:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: TaleDawn
I haven't seen at least Hillary demanding to send troops to Syria. A vote for the GOP is a vote for the war party.


It's kind of always been that way...Regan's military build up during the cold War, Bush Sr. with Gulf War I ... Bush Jr. with Gulf War II.

Now I know Clinton had the Balkans thing and a few smaller skirmishes here and there, but nothing like what the past presidents coming out of the GOP. And Obama could have done more to reduce forces...but if he did he'd be blamed for what happens, as he would get blamed now for not doing enough. LOL Damned if he did, damned if he didn't.


Dems have been schlepping off war to the pubs since forever.

Clinton had the 1st WTC attack, USS Cole, Kenya and Nigeria embassy attacks, Somalia and Bin Laden besides the balkans and that's just off the top of my head.

Obama let isis grow and blames Bush, hillary makes libya a failed state and together the ME is trashed.
Refugees all over europe, Syria is failing, Iran is on it's way to the bomb and has 150 billion extra bucks to spend on exporting terrorism.

obama is just letting it all burn, so it's on the next potus plate.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

We invaded a foreign country that never attacked us. An attack that we will be paying for at least a hundred years. That legacy is the Bush republican burden. Do they pay you to spread propaganda about dems or you do it for free.
edit on 11-3-2016 by MOMof3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 05:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: FullBloodedNative





posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

You mean, he's a party schill, who plays ball.

He's my Governor, and I like him, but he's got no chance.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: TaleDawn
I haven't seen at least Hillary demanding to send troops to Syria. A vote for the GOP is a vote for the war party.


Just give Hillary some time. She is as big a hawk to make any GOPer proud.




Hillary the Hawk

Such a candid admission of one’s mistakes is certainly refreshing. But unfortunately for Mrs. Clinton, words are worse than worthless during election season. When every one of a candidate’s lines is being scrubbed clean by her campaign staff, the only accurate barometer of a candidate’s stance is her past record. And in Mrs. Clinton’s case, a glance at her record reveals a galling disconnect between her actions as Secretary of State and the anti-war attitudes to which she pays deference in hindsight.

americablog.com...



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: burgerbuddy

We invaded a foreign country that never attacked us. An attack that we will be paying for at least a hundred years. That legacy is the Bush republican burden. Do they pay you to spread propaganda about dems or you do it for free.



The truth is always free.

Unfortunate that obama dropped the ball in iraq. It was a slam dunk, too.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: TaleDawn
I haven't seen at least Hillary demanding to send troops to Syria. A vote for the GOP is a vote for the war party.


Just give Hillary some time. She is as big a hawk to make any GOPer proud.




Hillary the Hawk

Such a candid admission of one’s mistakes is certainly refreshing. But unfortunately for Mrs. Clinton, words are worse than worthless during election season. When every one of a candidate’s lines is being scrubbed clean by her campaign staff, the only accurate barometer of a candidate’s stance is her past record. And in Mrs. Clinton’s case, a glance at her record reveals a galling disconnect between her actions as Secretary of State and the anti-war attitudes to which she pays deference in hindsight.

americablog.com...


Crap, she would just screw things up even more.

She played the warmonger and failed.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

What we are living with now are all consequences. Every one wants to forget that, so we can do it again.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Konduit

Well then, I guess that makes it all OK. (sarcasm)

Plus I do not like Hillary either and so that makes your "I know you are but what am I" post kind of wrong..



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: FullBloodedNative


You're limiting this to republicans?



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: EightTF3

Sure why not, if they actually buy into this. If someone is full of it 95 or 99 % of the time and they are top runners in the race, then yeah it's true.
edit on 11-3-2016 by FullBloodedNative because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: FullBloodedNative
a reply to: EightTF3

Sure why not, if they actually buy into this.


Just seems strange.......... Hillary and all



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT


The Left is in crisis mode. What we're seeing on the right is a natural process. What's happening on the left is a fiasco.

Wait. What?

You have it absolutely backward.
I did my usual "watch the replay tomorrow" thing just this morning.
There was no catty over-talking, no insults, and it resembled a serious "left" (Dem) debate.
It was the ONLY civilized debate the GOP has held for this season.

The audience was likewise respectful.

The GOP has been imploding since they 'won' Congress....I predicted it would happen, and so did many others.

Tonight Cruz suggested Trump could be the VP, when he made mention of Trump "being more than welcome to be president of the Smithsonian" - do you all even know what that meant? The VPOTUS is the president of the Smithsonian.

Cruz is a scumbag. Rubio is a kid. Kasich makes a lot of sense, and has a track record. Donald is toning down his 'stage presence' because he's far enough in the lead to finally do so. And Donald remains the only one willing to negotiate with foreign countries.

What REALLY pissed me off was when in closing arguments Cruz said "one of us will face Hillary Clinton" and made no mention of Bernie.

Really, Ted? No comment about if you have to face Sanders? He would totally crush Cruz in a general election, because Bernie actually stands for the things that "Christians" are supposed to stand for!!!!!
But no, Cruz has 'written off Bernie' - and when the two are head to head, Cruz will slink home humiliated to a forehead-flicking daughter and Goldman Sachs exec wife.......




edit on 3/11/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: TaleDawn
I haven't seen at least Hillary demanding to send troops to Syria. A vote for the GOP is a vote for the war party.


Maybe not but the Obama administration invaded how many more countries when he took office?

They dont platform on it but they do the same thing



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Several points...in reference to my statement about the left being in crisis, I go into more detail with MOMof3, a few pages back: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Secondly, I thank you for explaining the Smithsonian comment...I didn't connect that reference at the time.

Third, I like Sanders; he's a far better human being than Clinton ever will be, but the fix was in from the beginning...Unless she gets indicted, Hillary will be the nominee; Hillary knows it, The DNC knows it and now the RNC knows it. So don't blame Cruz for stating what is obvious to everyone but Bernie Sanders and his supporters.

Again, I would much rather see Sanders get the nomination, but Hillary will not be denied what is hers...Her Super Delegates are her 'Ace-in-the Hole' ...and she hasn't even begun to dip into her bag of dirty tricks to destroy Sanders should he ever become a real threat.
edit on 11-3-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

I've read the whole thread - I'm aware of your discussion with Momof3.

Third, I like Sanders; he's a far better human being than Clinton ever will be
or any of the Republicans running are

, but the fix was in from the beginning...Unless she gets indicted, Hillary will be the nominee; Hillary knows it, The DNC knows it and now the RNC knows it.


No. The "fix is" not in - and Sanders is a real threat to her. Just like Trump is a real threat to the GOP.


So don't blame Cruz for stating what is obvious to everyone but Bernie Sanders and his supporters.

It's not obvious, and you shouldn't promote such disinformation. Bernie is whooping butt......and now that we're done with the "South" (except Florida), he will stay ahead.


Again, I would much rather see Sanders get the nomination, but Hillary will not be denied what is hers...

It isn't "hers" and it certainly will be "denied her". This is a whole new animal this season. Trump and Bernie are upsetting the status quo - and everyone knows it, except maybe Cruz.


Her Super Delegates are her 'Ace-in-the Hole' ...

The Super-Delegates are not pledged to her. They are up for grabs until the convention.


and she hasn't even begun to dip into her bag of dirty tricks to destroy Sanders should he ever become a real threat.

He already is a real threat. Michigan and Kansas proved that. The primaries are now done in the deep South -
He will overtake her, just like Obama did. She won't be president.

She, alone, wants to "continue the Obama". NO ONE else running wants that. No one. Obviously.

All of the disgruntled Obama supporters (and I am one of them) do not want to continue his policies. She's not going to get the support of Obama supporters; and I think you underestimate Bernie's momentum. Several times already he has defied the odds - even the esteemed "538" Nate Silver's predictions!

Polls of a few hundred people at a time don't mean squat at this point. Please stay optimistic that Bernie will pull this off.....he is the Occupy Wall Street candidate, to her "I take lobby money and give speeches to Goldman Sachs for hundreds of thousands of dollars" - the people DO NOT WANT THAT. It's over.

And there's no "dirt" to find on Bernie. He's already addressed his arrest for civil disobedience and his 30 years ago comments about Cuba, etc.

There's nothing else to attack.
Her smug attitude isn't helping either. She behaves like this is all a charade. The people know otherwise. NO ONE wants a third "Obama" term or a third "Clinton" term. It's too late.


edit on 3/11/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
12
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join