Land of the Free, home of the spineless

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Nov 6, 2010
831
311
613
#21
Back to Biden, I don't think he'll get the nomination anyway. He's just got the most name recognition now. I can't imagine once the campaign really gets going and people start to see how old and tired he will certainly start to look, he'll fall back, particularly as the field starts to shrink.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#22
Back to Biden, I don't think he'll get the nomination anyway. He's just got the most name recognition now. I can't imagine once the campaign really gets going and people start to see how old and tired he will certainly start to look, he'll fall back, particularly as the field starts to shrink.
drop off and be replaced by whom? Frankly, there is not any "credible" candidate that is much younger.

Sanders (just as old and tired), Warren (also old) and Butterjig are the closest to him going into Iowa.

New Iowa poll: Biden lead shrinks as Warren, Buttigieg climb

A new Iowa poll shows Joe Biden is still leading the pack of 2020 Democratic candidates, though support has slipped three percentage points since March – and eight since December. Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg surge to a near-dead heat with Bernie Sanders for second place. Larry Sabato, director at the University of Virginia Center for Politics, joins Alex Witt to explain why the poll should be a “warning flare” to the Biden campaign.
 
Nov 6, 2010
831
311
613
#23
drop off and be replaced by whom? Frankly, there is not any "credible" candidate that is much younger.

Sanders (just as old and tired), Warren (also old) and Butterjig are the closest to him going into Iowa.

New Iowa poll: Biden lead shrinks as Warren, Buttigieg climb

A new Iowa poll shows Joe Biden is still leading the pack of 2020 Democratic candidates, though support has slipped three percentage points since March – and eight since December. Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg surge to a near-dead heat with Bernie Sanders for second place. Larry Sabato, director at the University of Virginia Center for Politics, joins Alex Witt to explain why the poll should be a “warning flare” to the Biden campaign.
Credible is tough to define this early. I doubt many would have called Trump a credible candidate at this stage of the game in the last go around, but he did his thing. I think right now there are some pretty good moderate candidates in the field, but they just don't have the name recognition, and there are just so damn many of them now. Once the debates start, I think the best will show up. Biden won't have the shock appeal Trump had in the primaries, and like I said, he'll show his age in that environment and I think it will be pretty obvious.

He does have the popularity in the rust belt though, and after the last election, that's going to mean more than anything to the dems. Anyway, a long way to go.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#24
Credible is tough to define this early. I doubt many would have called Trump a credible candidate at this stage of the game in the last go around, but he did his thing. I think right now there are some pretty good moderate candidates in the field, but they just don't have the name recognition, and there are just so damn many of them now. Once the debates start, I think the best will show up. Biden won't have the shock appeal Trump had in the primaries, and like I said, he'll show his age in that environment and I think it will be pretty obvious.

He does have the popularity in the rust belt though, and after the last election, that's going to mean more than anything to the dems. Anyway, a long way to go.
I don't think there are ANY moderates in the field (Biden is as close as it comes).... every one, to a "T", so far, has endorsed very, very radical positions.

By contrast, the GOP had a few really decent candidates at the top of the pack (as opposed to what the left is presenting to us at the moment. So, it's no wonder Trump was trailing badly)

If the left can come up with an anti-establishment candidate, then it could be an interesting 2020 contest - but all their candidates are hard-core party line, and nobody for the people)

Jeb Bush surges to lead GOP pack in new 2016 Presidential poll
06/22/15

Who gets left off that first debate stage? The NBC/WSJ poll measured 16 GOP candidates in our horserace question. And here are the 10 Republicans who make our poll’s Top 10 – the criteria being used for the first GOP debate in August – and the six who get left off:

  1. Jeb Bush 22%
  2. Scott Walker 17%
  3. Marco Rubio 14%
  4. Ben Carson 11%
  5. Mike Huckabee 9%
  6. Rand Paul 7%
  7. Rick Perry 5%
  8. Ted Cruz 4%
  9. Chris Christie 4%
  10. Carly Fiorina 2%
  11. Donald Trump 1%
  12. Lindsey Graham 1%
  13. John Kasich 1%
  14. Bobby Jindal 0%
  15. Rick Santorum 0%
  16. George Pataki 0%
 
Nov 6, 2010
831
311
613
#25
I don't think there are ANY moderates in the field (Biden is as close as it comes).... every one, to a "T", so far, has endorsed very, very radical positions.

By contrast, the GOP had a few really decent candidates at the top of the pack (as opposed to what the left is presenting to us at the moment. So, it's no wonder Trump was trailing badly)

If the left can come up with an anti-establishment candidate, then it could be an interesting 2020 contest - but all their candidates are hard-core party line, and nobody for the people)

Jeb Bush surges to lead GOP pack in new 2016 Presidential poll
06/22/15

Who gets left off that first debate stage? The NBC/WSJ poll measured 16 GOP candidates in our horserace question. And here are the 10 Republicans who make our poll’s Top 10 – the criteria being used for the first GOP debate in August – and the six who get left off:

  1. Jeb Bush 22%
  2. Scott Walker 17%
  3. Marco Rubio 14%
  4. Ben Carson 11%
  5. Mike Huckabee 9%
  6. Rand Paul 7%
  7. Rick Perry 5%
  8. Ted Cruz 4%
  9. Chris Christie 4%
  10. Carly Fiorina 2%
  11. Donald Trump 1%
  12. Lindsey Graham 1%
  13. John Kasich 1%
  14. Bobby Jindal 0%
  15. Rick Santorum 0%
  16. George Pataki 0%
Does that include Hickenlooper and Bullock?
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#26
Does that include Hickenlooper and Bullock?
Don't get me wrong, I liked Jim Webb last time around, but you saw where that went.

A Democratic candidate has to be totally dishonest (Biden, et al), or flat out leftist crazy (Sanders, Warren) to get the DNC nomination.

Frackenlooper (as they call him for his big oil stance) likely won't get past the radical elements of the party to even become the nominee. If that wasn't enough he's not enough anti-gun for the party crazies. (and then, of course, there is that name.... seriously?)

Bullock is already out before it even started.....

Steve Bullock, likely blocked from Democratic debate, says he's disappointed in the DNC,

June 10 - While not official yet, it appears Bullock failed to qualify for the first Democratic candidate debate. The Democratic National Committee says the candidates for the first debate must have at least 1% support in three polls the committee recognizes as legitimate or 65,000 unique contributors to make it to the debate stage.
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
7,856
3,722
743
49
#28
Fetus is Latin for infant.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
wrenhal is latin for "makes up stuff about abortion"

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0059:entry=fetus1
Bringing forth of young, is usually translated to roughly offspring. Which is another word for infant. It definitely doesn't mean 'clump of cells' like most liberals would have you believe.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,792
2,189
743
Where else but Stillwater
#29
Fetus is Latin for infant.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
A fetus is not a baby or infant, if you want to look up the more commonly used definition. But to you beyond the shadow of all doubt that it is a baby or infant from the very moment of conception. Did I read you right? And you quite passionately agree with OK State Sen. Silk that the baby absolutely must always have more rights to life than the mother under the law. NO exceptions. Right?
 
May 31, 2007
797
136
1,593
Edmond, OK
#33
Nobody close to moderate is getting the Dem nomination. That party has gone off the cliff. They’ve fallen into the trap of pandering to the loons, Hollywood, and MSM who all live in a fantasy land where all they care about are radical leftists ideas, ruining Trump, and destroying America. They need a Jim Webb type to re-center the party. But that ship sailed a long time ago.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,677
32,061
1,743
oklahoma city
#34
Fetus in Latin means a plant! They aren't babies, they are fruits!' Vegan abortions for all!

C'mon, this is stupidity. The word origin possibly come from many things including to the act of childbirth (or any birth or growth). This even says "figuratively" not literally. Sort of like calling a kid a rug rat doesn't mean they are a rat. It certainly does not "mean" infant although in the complete etymology it is listed with the 10 other things it sort of might have been used centuries ago. The comment has absolutely no purpose in the real debate.

My opinion is that people that make arguments like this are no longer at the point of rational thought on the subject. If a fetus is an infant, then anyone wanting an exception for rape or incest, such as the President, is for infanticide. It is the exact other side of the coin from people that want government sponsored abortion at any time for any reason. The majority of people are between those two outlandish positions trying to use rational thought on a difficult subject.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,677
32,061
1,743
oklahoma city
#36
I would have thought by this point in your life you would have understood the word figuratively is used to say the word isn't actually meaning how it is being represented. I guess not.
The abstract is a tough nut to crack for the concrete thinker.
(BTW, that doesn't mean it a real nut. I only mean that... um....well........... figuratively).
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
7,856
3,722
743
49
#37
Fetus in Latin means a plant! They aren't babies, they are fruits!' Vegan abortions for all!

C'mon, this is stupidity. The word origin possibly come from many things including to the act of childbirth (or any birth or growth). This even says "figuratively" not literally. Sort of like calling a kid a rug rat doesn't mean they are a rat. It certainly does not "mean" infant although in the complete etymology it is listed with the 10 other things it sort of might have been used centuries ago. The comment has absolutely no purpose in the real debate.

My opinion is that people that make arguments like this are no longer at the point of rational thought on the subject. If a fetus is an infant, then anyone wanting an exception for rape or incest, such as the President, is for infanticide. It is the exact other side of the coin from people that want government sponsored abortion at any time for any reason. The majority of people are between those two outlandish positions trying to use rational thought on a difficult subject.
My use of the word makes more sense than, clump of non living cells. Which is what liberals want it to mean all the way up to birth. Or those that want it to mean parasite. Tell me that I'm making a leap here and not them? Offspring is closer to infant than those.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,677
32,061
1,743
oklahoma city
#40
My use of the word makes more sense than, clump of non living cells. Which is what liberals want it to mean all the way up to birth. Or those that want it to mean parasite. Tell me that I'm making a leap here and not them? Offspring is closer to infant than those.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

I already addressed that point of one radical side or the other. But, sure, in the contest of is your radical statement more absurd than the other side's radical statement, you win! If someone out there has called a fetus a "clump of cells" they are developmentally incorrect. It is the morula that is the clump of cells, not a fetus. I agree with you that is a bigger falsehood than stretching a figurative point about an ancient word into the modern "meaning."



My opinion is that people that make arguments like this are no longer at the point of rational thought on the subject. If a fetus is an infant, then anyone wanting an exception for rape or incest, such as the President, is for infanticide. It is the exact other side of the coin from people that want government sponsored abortion at any time for any reason. .