Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can't click on the title of the thread to bring up the article. It needs to be in your post not the title.
No, but as your are online writing/typing a response, it isn't difficult to conduct a Google search of the title. In any event, the source of my post is clear. Whether you are able to click on a post or not, it is clearly established that my source is the NYT, which is the reason for my harsh reaction to your post.
The first response to the thread was able to figure out that the source was a NYT piece. So could you.
No, but as your are online writing/typing a response, it isn't difficult to conduct a Google search of the title. In any event, the source of my post is clear. Whether you are able to click on a post or not, it is clearly established that my source is the NYT, which is the reason for my harsh reaction to your post.
The first response to the thread was able to figure out that the source was a NYT piece. So could you.
Nope, if you are going to make an allegation then it's up to you to provide a link. Not my job to do that.
No, but as your are online writing/typing a response, it isn't difficult to conduct a Google search of the title. In any event, the source of my post is clear. Whether you are able to click on a post or not, it is clearly established that my source is the NYT, which is the reason for my harsh reaction to your post.
The first response to the thread was able to figure out that the source was a NYT piece. So could you.
Yeah, no. If you're going to post something have the courtesy to provide the link. Its the difference between you taking the effort to find it-and you're probably there allready, and 100's of people taking the effort. Without it original the post is just noise, as its obvious that you dont care enough to include a post, why should we care enough to do the work you should have.
I agree with their fears Rubio would make a very strong nominee for the reasons the left fears him (I predict that the GOP ticket will include Walker and Rubio, though in what order I'm not quite sure). Talk is that Hillary wants one of the Castro brothers (Mexican American politicians from Texas) as her VP running mate, but a Hispanic at the top of the ticket carries more weight.
People who are willing to prematurely crown Hillary the 2016 victor are delusional. While she'll be a very strong candidate, they underestimate the GOP bench and their appeal to voters who, despite their voting for Obama twice, may want to go in a different direction.
The GOP twice failed to offer an alternative to Obama.
Rubio sets up a complete Republican domination of all political power in the USA since all the Dems currently have is the President while Repubs control House, Senate, Governors and state Legislatures already.
Hillary will struggle with Rubio for three reasons:
A) He is Hispanic whereas she just condescends to Hispanics
B) He is as youthful and handsome as she is old and shopworn
C) He is an excellent, inspirational speaker whiles she sounds like a nutty substitute teacher.
None of these things mean that she wouldn't win the match up. As Cuban, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and South Americans may not identify with him as strongly as he thinks. Hillary is the latest democratic novelty act and some women will vote for her because she is a woman. Hillary, old as she is, harkens back to her popular husband, and Rubio, who has not done a lot himself, is the poorest candidate to raise the competency and accomplishment issue...in fact, he may remind some swing voters of a Republican version of Obama himself.
Whether either side wants to admit it or not, this election is probably going to come down to the economy. Right now, it looks like it is tanking, and if it does, then Hillary hasn't got a prayer. If things stabilize and turn around, then Hillary wins based on name recognition and girly parts.
Hillary will struggle with Rubio for three reasons:
A) He is Hispanic whereas she just condescends to Hispanics
B) He is as youthful and handsome as she is old and shopworn
C) He is an excellent, inspirational speaker whiles she sounds like a nutty substitute teacher.
None of these things mean that she wouldn't win the match up. As Cuban, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and South Americans may not identify with him as strongly as he thinks. Hillary is the latest democratic novelty act and some women will vote for her because she is a woman. Hillary, old as she is, harkens back to her popular husband, and Rubio, who has not done a lot himself, is the poorest candidate to raise the competency and accomplishment issue...in fact, he may remind some swing voters of a Republican version of Obama himself.
Whether either side wants to admit it or not, this election is probably going to come down to the economy. Right now, it looks like it is tanking, and if it does, then Hillary hasn't got a prayer. If things stabilize and turn around, then Hillary wins based on name recognition and girly parts.
Sorry, but it probably is as simple as that.
Well he backed amnesty at one time. Maybe hes trying to be like Reagan. But he flip.flops so.much that hes moee like Romney
[MOD CUT]
Last edited by Ibginnie; 05-24-2015 at 07:58 AM..
Reason: english only please
He does much, much, much better with extemporaneous speaking. Hillary may win based on who she is, but he will make her look foolish in any debate. Make no mistake about it.
You seem to be forgetting that this is the same woman who:
A) Flipped out an made a fool of herself when asked if illegals should have driver's licenses.
B) Lied about being shot at
C) Stood in front of a black crowd and spoke in a faux black accent.
D) Said on national television that she should be nominated because she could get the votes of "hard working white people" and not just "eggheads and black."
E) Cried in New Hampshire
etc.
Rubio had a bad moment...Hillary has had a lifetime without ANY good ones. She is Bidenesque in her political incompetence and inability to illustrate the simplest point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rubio would make a very strong nominee for the reasons the left fears him (I predict that the GOP ticket will include Walker and Rubio, though in what order I'm not quite sure). Talk is that Hillary wants one of the Castro brothers (Mexican American politicians from Texas) as her VP running mate, but a Hispanic at the top of the ticket carries more weight. 
