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.

 

The Democratic Party can't win in '08, they don't have the candidate.

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   
i think we democrates have excellent reps in the next election you people are full of # and have no clue what you are talking about!



ape

posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by sargentpepper
i think we democrates have excellent reps in the next election you people are full of # and have no clue what you are talking about!


well maybe you can go into detail and perhaps change my mind about the democrats !

this should be good.



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 10:05 AM
link   
A # and a #, you tell me the dems won't lose. I suppose it's not completely out of the question for the dem hq to ask Hillary to give the campaign machine a lube job when needed, but they gotta keep osama from running off with any of the parts.



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 10:18 AM
link   
HILLARY will win in 2008. She'll win the nomination for the dems and, as long as those pardon-gate family connections don't bite her in the butt, she will win the Oval Office as well. She's the most qualified, but she also has the most baggage.


ape

posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
HILLARY will win in 2008. She'll win the nomination for the dems and, as long as those pardon-gate family connections don't bite her in the butt, she will win the Oval Office as well. She's the most qualified, but she also has the most baggage.


please explain to me how she is the most qualified and what exactly she has accomplished to qualify her to be president of the US? aside from being a woman and a mother of course according to her.



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 11:03 PM
link   
The dems could nominate and run Satan himself and win.
They could even win with Howard Dean, or Gore, or anyone as long as
they run against the WAR.

The American people are sick of this war.

The Republicans bought this war and now they are gonna
have to accept that they were sold a bag of s*** and they are
gonna have to eat it.

There is no Republican that can distance himself or herself from this war
enough to win in 08.

All the dem bashing by rush and the other entertainers on the right can't change this.

Quit being crybabys and deal with it.

I see the Rush news letter copied and pasted on ATS and it would be amusing if it was'nt so pathetic.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Time will tell whaaaa,

however, we are already in war and everyone knows that during a time of war democrats talk about the past and what should of been done while republicans plan and discuss the future.
Regardless if the American people want out of Iraq they still want to win the war. The only Presidential candidate that will even try to win the war will be the Republican candidate. Americans are a more hopeful people than to ellect a leader that guarantees defeat. Don't believe me, look at Gore and Dean.


ape

posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
The dems could nominate and run Satan himself and win.
They could even win with Howard Dean, or Gore, or anyone as long as
they run against the WAR.

The American people are sick of this war.

The Republicans bought this war and now they are gonna
have to accept that they were sold a bag of s*** and they are
gonna have to eat it.

There is no Republican that can distance himself or herself from this war
enough to win in 08.

All the dem bashing by rush and the other entertainers on the right can't change this.

Quit being crybabys and deal with it.

I see the Rush news letter copied and pasted on ATS and it would be amusing if it was'nt so pathetic.


you're foolish, democrats are just as responsible for this war and their voting record proves it and hillary and bill made cases against saddam and wanted to attack him even in the 90's. when things get tough in iraq they flip right on the american people and act like they were mislead which is a garbage excuse. the only people running away from responsibility are democrats who want to see another killing fields of cambodia.

[edit on 3-3-2007 by ape]



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape
you're foolish,
[edit on 3-3-2007 by ape]


So the "thumpin" the GOP took in the last election doesn't mean anything?

What's going to change in 2 years?

If anyone's foolish it is You for believing the American people will accept scandals like Walter Reed, Foley, Gannon/Gorsh, no bid contracts, etc.

Even my old Republican, Baptist, right wing, Texan mother can see the corruption and lies.

By the way, what is "Victory" and "the Mission" to you?



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   
I think the "thumpin" was americans wanting to see if their would be a real distinct change in politics...which hasnt occured. The democrats were given a golden age of opportunity and thus far haven't done much to swade the American public... The republicans actually can take a stand on something while the dems just play the blame game and have nothing to offer.. I think sometimes that the dems focus to much on trying to embarrasses the republican party which isnt really giving our nation that real good leadership forward that we are looking for. Dont get me wrong, the republicans are far from perfect. But at least they have ideas that consist of more then the redundant, childish bashing that the dems result to.



[edit on 043131p://2103pm by semperfoo]



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo, But atleast they have ideas that consist of more then the redundant, childish bashing of the opponent.


[edit on 043131p://0403pm by semperfoo]


Please, Bill Clinton has been out of office for 8 years and childish bashing hasn't let up one bit.

What Ideas? A "surge" Work on Walter Reed now; three years after the
problems were first reported.

Help me out here. What else?


Originally posted by semperfoo I think sometimes that the dems focus to much on trying to embarrasses the republican party

[edit on 043131p://0403pm by semperfoo]



The Republicans are embarrassing them selves with out to much help from the dems.

reference this:
www.abovetopsecret.com...'

By the way before you trash me for being a "lib" I'm a Goldwater Republican. The GOP in it's current manifestation sucks!

[edit on 3-3-2007 by whaaa]

[edit on 3-3-2007 by whaaa]


ape

posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by ape
you're foolish,
[edit on 3-3-2007 by ape]


So the "thumpin" the GOP took in the last election doesn't mean anything?

What's going to change in 2 years?

If anyone's foolish it is You for believing the American people will accept scandals like Walter Reed, Foley, Gannon/Gorsh, no bid contracts, etc.

Even my old Republican, Baptist, right wing, Texan mother can see the corruption and lies.

By the way, what is "Victory" and "the Mission" to you?


yeah they took a thumpin and it was well deserved, I'm an independent for your information I have a feeling you are labeling me as a GOPer.

what exactly have the democrats done since they gained the majority? non binding resolutions? back door tactics aimed to cut funding? jefferson who is being investigated for bribes being put into homeland security posititons?? if the democrats dont believe in this war why dont they cut funding? why? they are playing politics.

democrats and republicans once again got us into iraq, republicans want to finish it while democrats want another cambodia, victory is a government which can hold it's own and a functioning military to suppress sectarian violence while US tropps eventually reduce in numbers. I know people who are serving in iraq right now, 1 brigade has set foot in baghdad so far and 5 more are going in and already violence has dropped and the people are going to the soldiers to inform them of anything suspicious seeing as the soldiers are living inside the city now and they feel safe.

please tell me why is it the senate approved the new general who's the master planner behind the surge yet scheme behind the scenes to hamper the mission ?? you think americans are blind to this? they are only reminding americans why they never voted for them and why the democrats lost all those previous elections in a row.

whats great is the lieberman factor in the senate, who basically warned the democrats to cut it out or he might switch to the GOP, thats why we have seen such a change of tone from the libs because they are cowards who want nothing but power.

yo semperfoo did you watch duncan hunter speak on cspan? talking about unbalanced trade with china among other topics and how our tax laws are to blame, he is a co sponsor of the fairtax and the speech was solid. he has my vote and prolly alot of other Independent votes along with Libertarians seeing he is a cosponser of a very popular bill


[edit on 4-3-2007 by ape]


df1

posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape
along with Libertarians...

Using "Libertarian" with the first letter capped is suggesting that the Libertarian Party supports the fairtax. To my knowledge this is not the case. Can you please show where the LP supports this tax or use the lowercase form of libertarian to avoid being misleading.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 10:17 PM
link   
whaaa
Im and independent. I vote for the guy that I feel best represents what I as an american citizen want, and feel is best for my country. Make no mistake, the democrats and republicans both have their cons.

ape I missed that man. Sounds good to me though.
Its only a matter of time before the fairtax becomes law.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape

Originally posted by sargentpepper
i think we democrates have excellent reps in the next election you people are full of # and have no clue what you are talking about!


well maybe you can go into detail and perhaps change my mind about the democrats !

this should be good.


Thanks to good ole W, it doesn't matter if the democratic party nomitated a turd as long as it was defacated on U.S. soil over 35 years ago. Dems will win thanks to the bumbling job of Bush. What's his approval rating? Americans are scared of republicans. I think our elections just a few months back prove that.


ape

posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by kleverone

Originally posted by ape

Originally posted by sargentpepper
i think we democrates have excellent reps in the next election you people are full of # and have no clue what you are talking about!


well maybe you can go into detail and perhaps change my mind about the democrats !

this should be good.


Thanks to good ole W, it doesn't matter if the democratic party nomitated a turd as long as it was defacated on U.S. soil over 35 years ago. Dems will win thanks to the bumbling job of Bush. What's his approval rating? Americans are scared of republicans. I think our elections just a few months back prove that.


yeah I woudl expect a response like this coming out of hollywood.

i would really like someone to explain to me why hillary or obama would be a great president, what exactly have they accomplished? do you people pay taxes in this country? do you people understand the direction the democrats want us to go in? it's the direction of big government. iraq is a tough issue but if you think americans are afraid of republicans you are seriously misguided. bush does not respresent a conservative agenda, IMO he is a globalist but the libs are a totaly different poison.

the democrats also won because the GOP held majority for so long with immigration not being checked and violence in iraq they wanted to see change, independent voters played a big role in the victory and have been let down along with the rest of the country. anyone who denys the garbage we have been seeing in congress and the senate since january is a total partisan. they have accomplished nothing aside from partisan bickering and backdoor tactics.


ape

posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by ape
along with Libertarians...

Using "Libertarian" with the first letter capped is suggesting that the Libertarian Party supports the fairtax. To my knowledge this is not the case. Can you please show where the LP supports this tax or use the lowercase form of libertarian to avoid being misleading.


I used " Libertarians ".

according to you a couple months ago you stated that Libertarians and libertarians are 2 different sects of the Libertarian party, the proper wording is left-libertarians but thats a different subject which i already corrected you on.

a large base of the Libertarian party supports the fairtax but some Libertarians do not, just like some conservatives support flat tax over the fairtax, no party as a whole will support a bill you will always have seperation.

you will notice in alot of my posts here I capitalize the L and sometimes i dont, it still means the same thing. using capitalization on the first letter does not mean the party supports it as a whole.

can you please give me some example of how socialism is better than captialism and what socialist societys are a good example that have thrived? what exactly has marxism done aside from making the poor poorer and government more dominant over the affiars of the citizen? I ask because of your avatar, it would appear you're a communist.


[edit on 4-3-2007 by ape]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 01:35 AM
link   
The whole two party system is a scam any way. It's just a game of good cop / bad cop to keep the general public busy so that they don't notice the laws go the same direction no matter whose in charge. I don't ever think you'll get a third party in the senate or presidency. One party or the other will commit political suicide just to insure that a third party cna't get their foot in the door.

In the mean time the two donkies and elephants lay down the smoke screen and play the game just eactly the way the big corporate guys tell them too, because who do you think buys them their positions. Washigton DC is full of nothing but high priced prostitutes maquerrading as politicians.

The two 'big parties' have every election planned years ahead of time and all the drama durring election time is whatever is written in the script to make it good television.


df1

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ape
I used " Libertarians ".

according to you a couple months ago

You have it backwards. When capitalized it refers to a proper name, hence the Libertarian Party. Lower case libertarian is used when merely describing a political ideology. It wouldn't necessarily surprise me if the LP at some point supported a fairtax, but they have not to this point. I go off checking the website, LP.org... every time I see Libertarian used as a proper name to see if it has indeed a changed its position. Please u2u me if the LP ever gives it's support to the fairtax, I'd be very interested.



can you please give me some example of how socialism is better than captialism and what socialist societys are a good example that have thrived?

A pure socialist government has never existed and neither has a pure capitalist form of government ever existed. Most modern governments are a combination of various ideologies that include both socialism and capitalism. Medicare, socialized medicine, thrives in the American system of government, just ask your grandparents or other senior citizens. Riots would ensue if the government tried to take Medicare away.



I ask because of your avatar, it would appear you're a communist.

My avatar is actually intended to make light of Marxism. I'm using it as a campaign button to get myself noticed in the ATS 2007 elections. Those which are interested should read my candidate platform before jumping to any conclusions about my being a Marxist and they might also want to checkout the identity of the guy pictured in my avatar. You might even vote for me after reading my platform as in many ways I am more libertarian than the Libertarian Party candidates.


[edit on 5-3-2007 by df1]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ape

Originally posted by kleverone

Originally posted by ape

Originally posted by sargentpepper
i think we democrates have excellent reps in the next election you people are full of # and have no clue what you are talking about!


well maybe you can go into detail and perhaps change my mind about the democrats !

this should be good.


Thanks to good ole W, it doesn't matter if the democratic party nomitated a turd as long as it was defacated on U.S. soil over 35 years ago. Dems will win thanks to the bumbling job of Bush. What's his approval rating? Americans are scared of republicans. I think our elections just a few months back prove that.


yeah I woudl expect a response like this coming out of hollywood.

i would really like someone to explain to me why hillary or obama would be a great president, what exactly have they accomplished?


What is that supposed to mean? Out of Hollywood? Oh a good answer? aww thanks man

I would say that either one of them has a much better record of accomplishment than Bush. Lets see besides being a horrible president, how many companies has Bush run into the ground? Face it, the republicans had their chance and blew it. You just don't want to face facts, plain and simple. Like I said earlier, it doesn't matter who the Dems nominate, there's your winner. The American people are officially Gun Shy of the GOP. So my earlier answer was dead on. Please explain to me how what I just told you doesn't make perfect sense. It may not be fair or how you want it to go down but sometimes reality isn't always pleasent. Care to present your views instead of just bashing others?


[edit on 5-3-2007 by kleverone]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join