Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

After the clown show last night it's apparent that the democrat party really has no counter to President Trump.  I don't think that there was a candidate on the stage yesterday that has a chance to beat President Trump in an election.  Much of the MSM seems to think that Elizabeth "Pocahontas" Warren is the the "winner" of last nights "debate".  If that's the best that the democrat party can present to the people we are looking at 4 more years of President Trump.  I just don't see moderates backing any one of the candidates that were on the stage.  

The only one with any form of "sense" to me is Tulsi Gabbard.  However, I strongly disagree with her position on the 2nd Amendment.  I also strongly disagree on many of her other positions, though they aren't as damaging to our basic rights.

Pretty much any other candidate that the democrats have out there... NOPE!

My guess is that someone else is going to jump in late in the game that appeals more to moderates and not so much to the far left.

For the record I am conservative and lean more center on some issues (not many).  I can stomach a democrat president that leans more center WAY more than I could stomach a far left or socialist president.

Watch Hillary jump back in, she wants a rematch anyway........

(10-16-2019, 04:19 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]Watch Hillary jump back in, she wants a rematch anyway........

Oh, God, no.  Please, no.

I don't think the native American thing is a big deal.
I grew up with kids who looked just as white as me but claimed to have some native American ancestry. It was a way to make yourself sound interesting. And I'm sure when Elizabeth Warren was young growing up in Oklahoma, it was an even more popular thing to talk about. Was it a dumb thing to talk about? sure. But every candidate has put out messages that make them seem silly and out of touch.
Especially Trump.

I would give any Democratic candidate a better than 50% chance of beating Trump, regardless of if they pick Biden or Warren. Now if they pick one of the fringe, one-note candidates like Tom steyer or Andrew Yang, they have no chance. But they're not going to pick one of those guys. They are going to pick somebody who is better known, and they will probably win.

Hillary is coming back in for sure. I am more curious how personal Bernie and the beer drinker will take it.

The troll level of Trump as it relates to Bernie when Hillary comes back in will be epic. Not to mention, the remaining democrats will eat Hillary alive in the debates as it relates to her history.

Finally, Barry's endorsement of Hillary may put Joe 6 feet under.

(10-16-2019, 05:59 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Hillary is coming back in for sure. I am more curious how personal Bernie and the beer drinker will take it.

The troll level of Trump as it relates to Bernie when Hillary comes back in will be epic. Not to mention, the remaining democrats will eat Hillary alive in the debates as it relates to her history.

Finally, Barry's endorsement of Hillary may put Joe 6 feet under.

I offer you a signature bet. You win if Hillary jumps in before super Tuesday. I win if she does not. You game?

None of the three current front runners, and not Hillary Clinton.

I'd like to see Trump debate Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar or Pete Buttigieg.

(10-16-2019, 09:12 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ]None of the three current front runners, and not Hillary Clinton.

I'd like to see Trump debate Kamala Harris,  Amy Klobuchar or Pete Buttigieg.

Those losers haven't earned the right to share the stage with Trump.  One of them slept their way to their current position with Willy, one forces employees to eat salads with a comb, and the other can't mayor a small city.

You need to set your standards for quality a little higher RJ.

(10-16-2019, 05:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the native American thing is a big deal.
I grew up with kids who looked just as white as me but claimed to have some native American ancestry. It was a way to make yourself sound interesting. And I'm sure when Elizabeth Warren was young growing up in Oklahoma, it was an even more popular thing to talk about. Was it a dumb thing to talk about? sure. But every candidate has put out messages that make them seem silly and out of touch.
Especially Trump.

I would give any Democratic candidate a better than 50% chance of beating Trump, regardless of if they pick Biden or Warren. Now if they pick one of the fringe, one-note candidates like Tom steyer or Andrew Yang, they have no chance. But they're not going to pick one of those guys. They are going to pick somebody who is better known, and they will probably win.

Nah, I don't see it.

Middle America hates the democrats right now and everything they're doing. My staunchest liberal friends have all but given up on Trump losing - because they see the hateful environment both sides have allowed to exist.

(10-17-2019, 08:44 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-16-2019, 05:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the native American thing is a big deal.
I grew up with kids who looked just as white as me but claimed to have some native American ancestry. It was a way to make yourself sound interesting. And I'm sure when Elizabeth Warren was young growing up in Oklahoma, it was an even more popular thing to talk about. Was it a dumb thing to talk about? sure. But every candidate has put out messages that make them seem silly and out of touch.
Especially Trump.

I would give any Democratic candidate a better than 50% chance of beating Trump, regardless of if they pick Biden or Warren. Now if they pick one of the fringe, one-note candidates like Tom steyer or Andrew Yang, they have no chance. But they're not going to pick one of those guys. They are going to pick somebody who is better known, and they will probably win.

Nah, I don't see it.

Middle America hates the democrats right now and everything they're doing. My staunchest liberal friends have all but given up on Trump losing - because they see the hateful environment both sides have allowed to exist.

That's why Mikesez needs the Electoral College to be abolished, that's the only way the enlightened city dwellers and coastal elites can win.

(10-16-2019, 09:12 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ]None of the three current front runners, and not Hillary Clinton.

I'd like to see Trump debate Kamala Harris,  Amy Klobuchar or Pete Buttigieg.

If one of those 2 clowns get the nomination, I'm voting 3rd party again.

(10-17-2019, 08:44 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-16-2019, 05:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the native American thing is a big deal.
I grew up with kids who looked just as white as me but claimed to have some native American ancestry. It was a way to make yourself sound interesting. And I'm sure when Elizabeth Warren was young growing up in Oklahoma, it was an even more popular thing to talk about. Was it a dumb thing to talk about? sure. But every candidate has put out messages that make them seem silly and out of touch.
Especially Trump.

I would give any Democratic candidate a better than 50% chance of beating Trump, regardless of if they pick Biden or Warren. Now if they pick one of the fringe, one-note candidates like Tom steyer or Andrew Yang, they have no chance. But they're not going to pick one of those guys. They are going to pick somebody who is better known, and they will probably win.

Nah, I don't see it.

Middle America hates the democrats right now and everything they're doing. My staunchest liberal friends have all but given up on Trump losing - because they see the hateful environment both sides have allowed to exist.

Where do you live?

(10-17-2019, 09:53 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-17-2019, 08:44 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]Nah, I don't see it.

Middle America hates the democrats right now and everything they're doing. My staunchest liberal friends have all but given up on Trump losing - because they see the hateful environment both sides have allowed to exist.

That's why Mikesez needs the Electoral College to be abolished, that's the only way the enlightened city dwellers and coastal elites can win.

I never said it should be abolished.

I said it's not working as designed. James Madison commented before he died that no one had intended for states to hold a popular election on a winner-take-all basis, and he was worried that this ruined his system. And today 48 out of 50 states do exactly this.

But my main concern is more how each party selects its candidate. if you add up the results of all of the 2016 Republican primaries Trump got only 45% of the vote.  The Republican National Convention should have been contested, and there should have been horse trading on the floor to see who the nominee would be. If we are going to have a two party system each of those two parties has to do better than that.

But I knew how you probably read all that and thought yourself y"he just said it should be abolished" because in your simple mind there are only two possible opinions on the matter. Either  "it's good and works as designed" or "it should be abolished."

I think the Dems best shot at this point is Pete

so he probably won't be the nom, cuz.... well... they dumb haha

(10-17-2019, 08:44 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-16-2019, 05:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the native American thing is a big deal.
I grew up with kids who looked just as white as me but claimed to have some native American ancestry. It was a way to make yourself sound interesting. And I'm sure when Elizabeth Warren was young growing up in Oklahoma, it was an even more popular thing to talk about. Was it a dumb thing to talk about? sure. But every candidate has put out messages that make them seem silly and out of touch.
Especially Trump.

I would give any Democratic candidate a better than 50% chance of beating Trump, regardless of if they pick Biden or Warren. Now if they pick one of the fringe, one-note candidates like Tom steyer or Andrew Yang, they have no chance. But they're not going to pick one of those guys. They are going to pick somebody who is better known, and they will probably win.

Nah, I don't see it.

Middle America hates the democrats right now and everything they're doing. My staunchest liberal friends have all but given up on Trump losing - because they see the hateful environment both sides have allowed to exist.

I live in rural Ohio (you can't get any more middle America than that.) People here are decisively hardcore Republicans and they have been ardent Trump supporters, but the tide is beginning to shift here. The tariffs have left farmers here in a bad way and my friends who were rigid Trump supporters are really starting to turn on him.

(10-17-2019, 12:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-17-2019, 09:53 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That's why Mikesez needs the Electoral College to be abolished, that's the only way the enlightened city dwellers and coastal elites can win.

I never said it should be abolished.

I said it's not working as designed. James Madison commented before he died that no one had intended for states to hold a popular election on a winner-take-all basis, and he was worried that this ruined his system. And today 48 out of 50 states do exactly this.

But my main concern is more how each party selects its candidate. if you add up the results of all of the 2016 Republican primaries Trump got only 45% of the vote.  The Republican National Convention should have been contested, and there should have been horse trading on the floor to see who the nominee would be. If we are going to have a two party system each of those two parties has to do better than that.

But I knew how you probably read all that and thought yourself y"he just said it should be abolished" because in your simple mind there are only two possible opinions on the matter. Either  "it's good and works as designed" or "it should be abolished."

It IS working as designed, otherwise we would have Shillary Killary as POTUS and the world would have ended

(10-17-2019, 12:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-17-2019, 09:53 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That's why Mikesez needs the Electoral College to be abolished, that's the only way the enlightened city dwellers and coastal elites can win.

I never said it should be abolished.

I said it's not working as designed. James Madison commented before he died that no one had intended for states to hold a popular election on a winner-take-all basis, and he was worried that this ruined his system. And today 48 out of 50 states do exactly this.

But my main concern is more how each party selects its candidate. if you add up the results of all of the 2016 Republican primaries Trump got only 45% of the vote.  The Republican National Convention should have been contested, and there should have been horse trading on the floor to see who the nominee would be. If we are going to have a two party system each of those two parties has to do better than that.

But I knew how you probably read all that and thought yourself y"he just said it should be abolished" because in your simple mind there are only two possible opinions on the matter. Either  "it's good and works as designed" or "it should be abolished."

Nah, I always consider your perspective, i.e. to change something (words, positions, the Electoral College, etc.) until they still have the same name but mean something entirely different.

(10-17-2019, 12:38 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-17-2019, 12:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I never said it should be abolished.

I said it's not working as designed. James Madison commented before he died that no one had intended for states to hold a popular election on a winner-take-all basis, and he was worried that this ruined his system. And today 48 out of 50 states do exactly this.

But my main concern is more how each party selects its candidate. if you add up the results of all of the 2016 Republican primaries Trump got only 45% of the vote.  The Republican National Convention should have been contested, and there should have been horse trading on the floor to see who the nominee would be. If we are going to have a two party system each of those two parties has to do better than that.

But I knew how you probably read all that and thought yourself y"he just said it should be abolished" because in your simple mind there are only two possible opinions on the matter. Either  "it's good and works as designed" or "it should be abolished."

It IS working as designed, otherwise we would have Shillary Killary as POTUS and the world would have ended

If it worked as designed, there would have been no primary elections, no Republican national convention, no democratic national convention, etc. Those things came after the designers were cold in their graves.

(10-17-2019, 12:37 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ]I think the Dems best shot at this point is Pete

so he probably won't be the nom, cuz.... well... they dumb haha

I don't know about Florida, but where I'm from (rural Ohio), a gay president wouldn't fly. I know people who hate Trump, who would actually vote for him over a gay candidate. I don't think Buttigieg has any chance at getting the nomination, much less beating Trump. At this point, I think it's either gonna be Biden or Warren.