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: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by kleverone
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.



Is George W. Bush running for office again in 08? Im just wondering because reading your post one would think that would be the case...

hopefully the american ppl can think for themselves and decide on who they think best represents the US regardless of political status or "popularity". If its a dem then so be it. To me, as an independent, the dems want a bigger government which will make my voice and countless other americans even more unheard of. On the flip side, you have a lot of republicans who are pushing forward and actually giving us a plan for the future. for instance, many republicans are on board for the fairtax, which will return the US as a manufacturing juggernaut once again. It will change this nation for the better. It deals away with the IRS and the corrupt income tax and makes our nations individuals as successful as they desire. The fairtax also makes the US government more transparent to the american ppl...which I think we all could appreciate..


I think our elections just a few months back prove that.

I think one of the things ppl need to remember here is that the american ppl are giving the dems a chance just like they did the republicans. The dems need to either take a sh*t or get off the pot. Its that simple. The american ppl wont tolerate incompetence from either party, as witnessed last November. So I wouldnt say that the dems are safe bet by any means.




[edit on 123131p://1903pm by semperfoo]



df1

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo
Is George W. Bush running for office again in 08? Im just wondering because reading your post one would think that would be the case...

Everybody is running against Bush policies in 2008, including his own party. This isn't a big surprise



The fairtax also makes the US government more transparent to the american ppl...which I think we all could appreciate..

You misrepresent this solution to the problems with our tax system as if it is a new problem and the fairtax is a revolutionary solution. Steve Forbes was pitching this plan years ago. Neither the Republicans or Democrats want government transparency.

How many years with a majority in both houses did the Republicans have to make the fairtax a done deal?


The american ppl wont tolerate incompetence from either party, as witnessed last November.

What we witnessed last November is that the American people are intolerant of an endless parade of flag draped caskets in a war for oil, however they appear to have an infinite tolerance for incompetence. Otherwise why would the American people keep electing Democrats and Republicans that operate contrary to their interest over and over again.


ape

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by semperfoo
Is George W. Bush running for office again in 08? Im just wondering because reading your post one would think that would be the case...

Everybody is running against Bush policies in 2008, including his own party. This isn't a big surprise



The fairtax also makes the US government more transparent to the american ppl...which I think we all could appreciate..

You misrepresent this solution to the problems with our tax system as if it is a new problem and the fairtax is a revolutionary solution. Steve Forbes was pitching this plan years ago. Neither the Republicans or Democrats want government transparency.

How many years with a majority in both houses did the Republicans have to make the fairtax a done deal?


The american ppl wont tolerate incompetence from either party, as witnessed last November.

What we witnessed last November is that the American people are intolerant of an endless parade of flag draped caskets in a war for oil, however they appear to have an infinite tolerance for incompetence. Otherwise why would the American people keep electing Democrats and Republicans that operate contrary to their interest over and over again.


steve forbes ia a flat tax supporter, get it right. and yes the fairtax is revolutionary as it adresses the key problems this nation faces. please dont get it twisted.

secondly in a thread a while back you said when using lower case l's for libertarians meant reference to a sect of libertarian party in which you considered yourself apart of, I said the proper usage was left-libertarians and you conceded. using capitalization does not mean you're talking about the party as a whole. some Libertarians support fairtax, some Libertarians do not. just like some Conservatives support fairtax and some support the flat tax.

yes the republicans did hold majority but the fairtax first started being researched in 1995, major replacement like this bill takes a grassroots movement and time, what matters is right now and this bill has just as many co sponsors in the 110th as it did in the 109th, mostly conservatives who are supporting this bill, try not to back track ok?

you're gonna give the war for oil line? dude you're weak. democrats and republicans both got us into iraq, the democrats were given a chance ( because of iraq ) and the senate is still basically republican with the lieberman factor. not much of a gain infact they gained less than half of what the republicans gained in 94, so I would not call this a major victory for the dems.


ape

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by kleverone

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]


first of all Rudy G has a big (R) right by his name, he is kicking the crap out of all the democratic candidates by a very large margine, explain away please because according to you the people are running away from republicans. hollywood people are weak in politics, your post proves my point, continue patting yourself on the back.

first of all yes I agree people in this country disagree with bush, that doesn't mean they are running away from conservatives, it means they dislike bush. the problem with you democrats is that you misread the american people in this last election, your leaders got all smug and started pulling backdoor tactics to cut troop funding with murtha, non binding resolutions wastiing my tax dollars instead of doing something significant like standing up for your beliefs about this war and take action, something they dont think is politically viable.

chuck shumer saying he wants to turn this into vietnam? oh yeah americans voted dems in for another vietnam. they are hurting themselves so bad right now infact they have totally backed off of iraq because of lieberman, joe biden trying to pull that garbage in the senate prompted lieberman to act and threaten a party switch giving GOP control of the senate. so now all of a sudden they dont stand for crap because they want to retain power with all of the committees etc. what a bunch of cowards and yet you're so blind you cannot see this, typical hollywood.


your earlier answer was not dead on infact it was a joke, you want to just add input without going into detail... I will ask 1 more time what exactly have barack and hillary accomplished to qualify them for the presidency? what have they done?

they have horrible voting records, they pander to individuals like we saw in alabama, they flip and flop ( hillary ) with iraq this is documented, barack has always had the same stance on iraq so atleast he has some kind of integrity. do you want complete government control over your healthcare and more of your income? do you even earn an income or are you a hollywood mama's boy? you hollywood people are so out of touch with america is sickening. you answer my question on how these democratic front runners are qualified to be our leader and what they have accomplished.




[edit on 5-3-2007 by ape]

[edit on 5-3-2007 by ape]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape

first of all Rudy G has a big (R) right by his name, he is kicking the crap out of all the democratic candidates by a very large margine, explain away please because according to you the people are running away from republicans. hollywood people are weak in politics, your post proves my point, continue patting yourself on the back.



The only point being proven in any of these posts is that you are good at stereotyping someone based on their geographical location. Twice you have assumed something about me based on the town I live in. That is beyond ignorant. Concrats.. you've just made my ingore list


ape

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
who are you kidding I live in santa clarita I know you hollywood libs plenty well. you're talking to a so cal dude born and raised.

[edit on 5-3-2007 by ape]


df1

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape
mostly conservatives who are supporting this bill, try not to back track ok?

Stop campaigning for this novelty tax program on nearly every thread in which you post and it will not be necessary for me to repeat myself. It is not like I stalk the fairtax threads. Our system of taxation is completely irrelevant so long as the bankers own the FED and control our money supply. Until this is corrected selecting the fairtax as your preferred method of taxation is the equivalent of selecting blue as the color for your bedroom.



you're gonna give the war for oil line...

It is the reason for the US being Iraq. You are just in denial.



democrats and republicans both got us into iraq...

Absolutely true. I cut the Democrats no slack on any issue.



the democrats were given a chance...

Your chance is the Republicans get 6 years and the democrats 3 months. Both parties have had too damn long, but your logic is still partisan.



so I would not call this a major victory for the dems.

Call it whatever you like, but I bet the President wouldn't agree given the verbal butt whipping he gets from the Democrats in congress on a daily basis these days. Have it your way.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 08:05 PM
link   
I had thought that Obama would play second fiddle to Hillary in order to get on the ticket as VP, but I guess I may have been wrong. It does look like they're going to duke it out with each other.

Perhaps when the dust settles, neither one will be electable.


ape

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 08:44 PM
link   


Your chance is the Republicans get 6 years and the democrats 3 months. Both parties have had too damn long, but your logic is still partisan.


hah have you seen whats been going on in congress and the senate? it took a lieberman threat to calm the democrats backdoor tactics down, only through the fear that they would lose majority in the senate and the committees, and also very low approval ratings. I think congress approval rating is lower than the presidents, dont talk to me about partisanship.



Call it whatever you like, but I bet the President wouldn't agree given the verbal butt whipping he gets from the Democrats in congress on a daily basis these days.


oh yeah, because the democrats were voted in to give the president 'verbal butt whippings'. yeah what a productive use of our tax dollars. they got voted in because they promised change and a new strategy but whats funny is I have yet to hear this mystery strategy. only thing I have seen is back door tacitcs and wasted tax dollars.



It is the reason for the US being Iraq. You are just in denial.


no... I'm just not going to go off of something thats completly opinion based, you have nothing to back your opinion up. you gonna give me the euro crap? please.



Stop campaigning for this novelty tax program on nearly every thread in which you post and it will not be necessary for me to repeat myself. It is not like I stalk the fairtax threads.


campaigning? more like bringing to light why the democrats will not win in 08, they are all for bigger government and higher taxation ( right down your alley). we are talking about why this weak political party will not win and one of the reasons is because they dont have any good ideas. taxation in this country is a verty important political topic.



Our system of taxation is completely irrelevant so long as the bankers own the FED and control our money supply. Until this is corrected selecting the fairtax as your preferred method of taxation is the equivalent of selecting blue as the color for your bedroom.


you're a political radical as most marxists are. what you propose is what then? who do you want in control? you thought steve forbes was the man behind the fairtax, I think it's obvious you dont know what you're talking about.

[edit on 5-3-2007 by ape]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

It is the reason for the US being Iraq. You are just in denial.


I disagree. It is no lie that many nations had the same intelligence that the US had which indicated that saddam had WMD's. Saddam himself did not allow the UN inspectors full access of certain facility's. With the intelligence the world had and saddam doing nothing to calm the WMD speculation, we had no choice but to act or sit idly by until saddam did have the weapons. Before we invaded in 91, saddam did have nuclear weapons program. Also, it was said that saddam was waiting for the weapons ban in Iraq to be uplifted just before we invaded. It was said that he was waiting for this to start back up on his WMD programs. So I disagree with your "opinion"..


df1

posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape
backdoor tactics down...

The only visible backdoor tactic is the location in which current administration is screwing the American people.



and wasted tax dollars.

Oh please. The Republicans wasted years of man-hours and spent tens of millions of dollars proving Bill Clinton had consentual sex out of wedlock and you have the gall to whine about wasted tax dollars after this witch hunt.



you're a political radical as most marxists are.

Our founding fathers were also political radicals, so I accept that label from you as a badge of honor. I have a sign under my user name that says I'm a Marxist, so that part is redundant.


ape

posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 06:32 PM
link   


Do You Get Paid For Spamming The FairTax?


no I work in telecom, who's spamming? the fairtax is a political topic in which I always bring up in a poltiical discussion. I dont accuse you of spamming socialism. the problems with socialists and liberals is they hate opposing views.



Oh please. The Republicans wasted years of man-hours and spent tens of millions of dollars proving Bill Clinton had consentual sex out of wedlock and you have the gall to whine about wasted tax dollars after this witch hunt.


yeah because back in the late 90's we had 2 wars and politicians attempting to undermine troops, get a clue. you are so weak it's amusing.



Our founding fathers were also political radicals, so I accept that label from you as a badge of honor. I have a sign under my user name that says I'm a Marxist, so that part is redundant


our founding fathers were not socialists, they believed in a small federal government while you advocate for complete government take over of the individual. you should not be honored as you represent communism.



The only visible backdoor tactic is the location in which current administration is screwing the American people.


how am I getting screwed? I'm 23 and have a great job, this countrys economy is strong. plenty of opportunity unless you're a complete lazy ass. however I do agree with you on a couple things that I think we are getting screwed on.. taxation, immigration, social security , outsourcing ( tied to taxation ), and wastefull spending. oh and also a huge federal government which needs to be checked. I believe some states are suing the feds because they are not paying up their share for housing of illegals in jail.



[edit on 6-3-2007 by ape]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 06:57 PM
link   
i think its time that we break the mold of the prez

Men in this contry have screwed it up enough we should have a female prez so she can fix the crap that you men have created



posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 11:40 PM
link   
I'd love to vote for a woman president in '08, I just don't see one, unless you mean Hilary, but she looks more like the guy on the freecreditreport.com commercials than he does and she even talks more masculine too.

Unless Hilary starts giving every speech like she is speaking in front of a black crowd, "and you'all know what I'm talking about!"(see infamous Hilary quotes) I'm not going to vote for her.

I hope she starts giving speeches in front of the massive amounts of illegals that are going to vote for her, I can't wait to hear her natural accent en espanol, "and you'all know what I'm talking about!!!!"



posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Low Orbit
I hope she starts giving speeches in front of the massive amounts of illegals that are going to vote for her, I can't wait to hear her natural accent en espanol, "and you'all know what I'm talking about!!!!"


She's not running for the Republican nomination. Sheesh.

It's the business interests of the GOP under Senór Bush that reduced Clinton's record prosecutions of illegal trafficking and corporate infractions to near ZERO in 6 short years.

It's Senór Bush that increased WELFARE to immigrants to the highest level of all time.

And why not? It's Senór Bush that was raised by an illegal and has one raising his kids.

Or so he told Hispanic Magazine in 2004 when he was running for re- elección



posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 10:03 AM
link   
The way I see illegal immigration is that it's an issue neither side wants to touch because they know it's devicive and in the end it will lose them votes regardless of which stance they take on it. It's a losing issue to politicians.

However, I am more willing to blame the democratic party since they are suppose to be the party of the "blue collar" worker. Republicans are usually in support of less restrictions for businesses and push for the rights of business owners while the dems usually make their career out of fighting for the little guy.

Today it seems as if both parties are the same and that both will pander themselves soley out to those of the big business community. What is best for the average American worker has been forgotten and replaced with what is best for the share holders, what a shame!



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   


OH look.. Dumb and dumber!


ape

posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo


OH look.. Dumb and dumber!



HAHAHAHA, classic. man thats classic .



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Given the fact that Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar (no mean feat) dumb and dumber hardly applies. To be a Rhodes scholar means he is probably a hell of a lot smarter than you are semperfoo.

As for the Democrats not having a winnable candidate the only thing I can say is that the Republicans don't either. It really is on both sides a sorry mess.

What I am thinking could happen on the Democratic side is that with this long run up Obama, Clinton etal will so bloody themselves in infighting that none of them will be able to get the nomination which will open the door for the convention to actually become a nominating convention again and have a dark horse like Al Gore to step into the gap (or be drafted) into offering himself as the candidate.... and he can definitely win.



posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo
OH look.. Dumb and dumber!


And the leading Republican nominees?



Are you SERIOUS?


Secret lovers... that's what we are...

Do you think Mark Foley holds Goul's purse when he and McCain plot their pro-gay marriage, pro-partial birth abortion takeover of the Grand Old Pedophiles in the cloak room?




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join