Pennsylvania predictions?
- Thread starter WRL
- Start date
evince
Truthmatters
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Hillary by 5% or less. This should be the final blow to Hillary, but my guess is she will continue finding excuses to stay in until the convention. Or until someone tells her she is really really really NOT going to steal enough of the supers to win.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
As has been mentioned before... the Dems have outnumbered the Reps by similar numbers in recent primary elections only to go on and lose the general. Primary numbers mean shit.
But as for the first part of your post.... yes, it is idiotic to assume that losing a primary in a state would translate to losing the state in the general. I seriously doubt anyone thinks Obama would lose CA in the general.
No idea what the bolded part means, but I take it from your second sentence that you actually think she’s going to win PA. Well under five points and I think it becomes very arguable that she needs to get out. So I will take that. Above five points, and she’s staying in, and that’s a bad thing. Though, the Republicans, and not a republican republicans will love it.
Little-Acorn
New member
The Dem race for the nomination is a contest to see who can give us the most socialism - and is being waged between two VERY highly qualified candidates for the job.
Why should we care who wins a contest like that?
Hopefully, Hillary by 20 points, though I haven't bothered to watch the polls. But whatever keeps the race tight and keeps the two Dems clawing at each other for as long as possible, will be good for the nation since it will tear both down and enable a Republican win. Not that McCain is any great prize, being a quasi-liberal, but he is tons better than the other two.
Why should we care who wins a contest like that?
Hopefully, Hillary by 20 points, though I haven't bothered to watch the polls. But whatever keeps the race tight and keeps the two Dems clawing at each other for as long as possible, will be good for the nation since it will tear both down and enable a Republican win. Not that McCain is any great prize, being a quasi-liberal, but he is tons better than the other two.
evince
Truthmatters
Yeah because you phliosophy on governmant has worked so well huh?
It takes and especially lame assclown to ask for more war, death, waste of treasure, Bankruptcys, oil price quadrupling, dollar dropping, Job losing, inflation creating, world respect losing, Foreclosuer causing, deficit spending failure like we are experiencing now from you lame partys ideas.
It takes and especially lame assclown to ask for more war, death, waste of treasure, Bankruptcys, oil price quadrupling, dollar dropping, Job losing, inflation creating, world respect losing, Foreclosuer causing, deficit spending failure like we are experiencing now from you lame partys ideas.
sHH... Misogynist....
evince
Truthmatters
Lately, we have increased the size of government in order to stay in office. And soon, soon, if we don't remember what we were elected to do, we will lose both our principles and our office, and we will leave as part of our legacy a mountain of debt and bankrupt entitlement programs that our children's grandchildren will be suffering from long after we have departed this earth. - John McCain
When did McSame say this ? 20 years ago?
When did McSame say this ? 20 years ago?
I don't know. It was a while back and it should have been followed. His prediction was very accurate.
Little-Acorn
New member
Don't know, it hasn't been tried recently.
Last time anybody even came close, was in the 1980s, with big tax cuts, a strengthened military, international negotiations from strength, and reductions of the regulatory burden from "crushing" to merely "onerous". But Congress still spent like a bunch of drunken sailors, skyrocketing the debt.
Still, the results were big reductions in unemployment, interest rates, and poverty for all classes, the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the freeing of more people than at any time in history since the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Bad news was, the debt also soared, as Congress demanded tons of spending as the price of letting Reagan have his tax cuts and military buildup, and Reagan caved and signed the budgets.
Though hardly perfect, it's not a bad record - one that continued for decades except for temporary economic slowdowns caused by GWHB 41's tax increases and Clinton's oppressive regulation of industry. And it's far better than anything the tax-and-spend liberals have EVER managed.
Well, someone should get a memo to 2008 McCain and tell him that while back McCain was right and should be followed. His prediction was accurate. I guess he's trying to make is accurater with his latest policy proposals.
You mean lowering discretionary spending? Yes.
He doesn't intend to lower discretionary spending. He intends to increase it. Freezing less than half of the discretionary budget and increasing the other more than half is not lowering. It's increasing. And at the same time he wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent and lower additional taxes all while remaining committed to Iraq indefinitely.
That's deficit spending baby. Or as John McCain once put it "leav[ing] as part of our legacy a mountain of debt and bankrupt entitlement programs that our children's grandchildren will be suffering from long after we have departed this earth."
Ah, yes. However, in the past, the Ds have told me that was "cutting" programs. I'll take their word for it this time.
I prefer less than more when it comes to spending. Neither of the lefty candidates intend to decrease any spending other than on Iraq and think that will magically make it all butterflies and pearls.
The reality is, he was right. The R's didn't act responsibly and lost seats in the house. The R's didn't stop the idiot in the WH from spending like a freaky liberal. They lost seats in the Senate...
Whether or not he is running on that platform now doesn't change that I believe he is right. When they didn't do what they were voted in to do, they lost their job.
Socrtease
Verified User
LOL Elitist much?