America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 12 years ago by DrMaddVibe. 31 replies replies.
Bye Rick Perry!
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
DrMaddVibe Offline
#1 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 7:27 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
I can't remember why anyone would vote for you!whip
wheelrite Offline
#2 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 7:50 AM EST
Joined: 11-01-2006
Posts: 50,119
He makes Biden look like JFK
DrMaddVibe Offline
#3 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 8:00 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
wheelrite wrote:
He makes Biden look like JFK



True, but when you can't articulate what your basic platform is...what separates you from the pack...when all you can do is just blink....Blink sorry.


We already have a moron sitting behind the Resolute Desk. We don't want or need another one.
watchurai Offline
#4 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 8:42 AM EST
Joined: 09-17-2008
Posts: 9,289
Spoken Gaff of the Century Award. And that is saying something in the recent political arena.
tailgater Offline
#5 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 9:04 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
oops.
elk hunter Offline
#6 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 11:18 AM EST
Joined: 03-20-2009
Posts: 10,331
I guess he should have been using Obama's teleprompters..... They have ALL the answers.....
DrMaddVibe Offline
#7 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 11:20 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
elk hunter wrote:
I guess he should have been using Obama's teleprompters..... They have ALL the answers.....



Ron Paul and Mittens were feeding him...what a hilarious exchange.

Not ready for primetime!
elk hunter Offline
#8 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 11:38 AM EST
Joined: 03-20-2009
Posts: 10,331
Ahem...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
bloody spaniard Offline
#9 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 11:38 AM EST
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
I would support Gingrich- Cain even as a third party ticket. Both are smart & appear to like each other as well.
IMHO the rest don't stand a chance- especially Romney.
elk hunter Offline
#10 Posted: Thu, Nov 10 2011, 11:44 AM EST
Joined: 03-20-2009
Posts: 10,331
Oh don't get me wrong, I am not necessarily a Perry fan but, I just think it is funny that people are jumping on him for a mistake when we have the likes of Obama/Biden in office...
rfenst Offline
#11 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 11:22 AM EST
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,383
bloody spaniard wrote:
I would support Gingrich- Cain even as a third party ticket. Both are smart & appear to like each other as well.
IMHO the rest don't stand a chance- especially Romney.


Gingrich is brilliant, but I cannot side with him based on his socio-religous policies and social policies/positions. I strongly suspect Cain's support will have completely abandoned him within no more than two or three weeks. Romney, in my opinion, is real good VP material, nothing more right now. The R's have got to offer something better unless the economy dives again/more.
bloody spaniard Offline
#12 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 11:45 AM EST
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
You could be right, Robert. Your posts are often thought-provoking.

However, if I remember correctly, the top Republicans in the polls during the last pre-election were Giuliani & Honeysuckle, er, Huckabee before lame McCain snatched the nomination.
Either way, barring a miracle, Obama's a shoo-in IMO.
rfenst Offline
#13 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 1:34 PM EST
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,383
bloody spaniard wrote:
You could be right, Robert. Your posts are often thought-provoking.

However, if I remember correctly, the top Republicans in the polls during the last pre-election were Giuliani & Honeysuckle, er, Huckabee before lame McCain snatched the nomination.
Either way, barring a miracle, Obama's a shoo-in IMO.



Giuliani was a flop because he was clueless. He had popular appeal as an outsider, but no real political machine on the ground in each state.

McCain was the lesser of two evils for me, but he blew my already- shaky confidence by lying to Letterman (seriously), insisting on delaying the Republican Convention, and the way he "parachuted" in to and ran to Washington during the financial crisis in 2008. It didn't leave me with an impression that he would make calm, collected decisions. Obama came off as far more serious and McCain left me with the impression that he makes rash, uncalculated decisions- from the gut.

Obama, after a couple months of "soul searching", became the new lesser of two evils for me. Had things gone right however, I would have voted for Hillary without reservation.

The economy is historically interesting in that it was the real reason Bush1 lost re-election. It took a few more months than he had touted for it to come around from recession. Had it done so on time, Bush1 would have probably beat Bill Clinton. I really liked Bush1 as our President as I did with Reagan. Flaws aside, they still made me feel good as an American. The economy was great during Clinton. The trade deficit was down, social programs were fairly well funded and the dollar was strong. But, I cannot give Clinton all or too much of the credit for that. Economic cycles have lives of their own. Worldwide financial problems hurt everyone else- like Greece and Italy right now.

Anyhow, I have probably given too much fodder here for others to start making personal attacks, I do believe as of right now- Obama wins.
bloody spaniard Offline
#14 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 2:31 PM EST
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
rfenst wrote:
...
McCain was the lesser of two evils for me, but he blew my already- shaky confidence by lying to Letterman (seriously), insisting on delaying the Republican Convention, and the way he "parachuted" in to and ran to Washington during the financial crisis in 2008. It didn't leave me with an impression that he would make calm, collected decisions. Obama came off as far more serious and McCain left me with the impression that he makes rash, uncalculated decisions- from the gut.

Obama, after a couple months of "soul searching", became the new lesser of two evils for me. Had things gone right however, I would have voted for Hillary without reservation.

The economy is historically interesting in that it was the real reason Bush1 lost re-election. It took a few more months than he had touted for it to come around from recession. Had it done so on time, Bush1 would have probably beat Bill Clinton. I really liked Bush1 as our President as I did with Reagan. Flaws aside, they still made me feel good as an American. The economy was great during Clinton. The trade deficit was down, social programs were fairly well funded and the dollar was strong. But, I cannot give Clinton all or too much of the credit for that. Economic cycles have lives of their own. Worldwide financial problems hurt everyone else- like Greece and Italy right now.

Anyhow, I have probably given too much fodder here for others to start making personal attacks, I do believe as of right now- Obama wins.




Again, all salient points IMHO, and I agree with much of what you say. Not sure as to why you unduly feel that you would be under personal attack. Perhaps I haven't visited this forum much...

To me, McCain is calculated in his miscalculations because he unfortunately has a screw loose. His theatrics when he dramatically put his campaign on hold to return to DC in order to right a "tilting ship" was laughable. Not worthy of a B movie screenplay. He subsequently voted for the bailout of his banking pals anyway. He's also got a track record for taking the politically safe & expedient route on political matters since he began running in Arizona. Hard to believe that his days in the Hanoi Hilton were not doctored up & exaggerated much like Kennedy's on PT109 for PR purposes but that's for others to decide.

Bush Sr. (IMO) lost to Clinton because he lied about raising taxes and because of the 3rd party candidate, Perot, who stole more conservatives & independents from Bush than he did liberals from Clinton. Bill "Slick Willy" Clinton was blatant liar who did an arguably good job governing once he was full-nelsoned by a Republican congress into governing from the center.

All things considered, Hillary would have probably made a much better President than Obama. Like the hapless yet lucky to be elected Bush Jr., Obama just happened to be in the right place at the right time. His constituency will not abandon him unlike the Republican's who will probably opt to stay home or write in a futile third party candidate rather than vote for another politician who will revert back to chameleon once in power.

Obama will win & long be remembered as the President who just happened to be at the helm when this Titanic of a country went down.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#15 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 6:46 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
rfenst wrote:
The economy is historically interesting in that it was the real reason Bush1 lost re-election.




WRONG!!!


The Arkansas Governor held that state in a death grip. Google Mena, AK and Willow Run Airport...what do they have in common?

Just say no.


Gimmie a break. He was going to blow a whistle and instead cut a deal. Usher in 43 and you see the bigger picture.

They really need a "throwin' up devil horns and head bobbin'" smiley.
jackconrad Offline
#16 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 6:51 PM EST
Joined: 06-09-2003
Posts: 67,461
Maybye we could do better with a Dolt instead of a Genius
DrMaddVibe Offline
#17 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 7:02 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
jackconrad wrote:
Maybye we could do better with a Dolt instead of a Genius



We could do better with just a can of Jolt!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#18 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 7:07 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
http://tinyurl.com/77q2qvt
wheelrite Offline
#19 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 7:11 PM EST
Joined: 11-01-2006
Posts: 50,119
Ross Perot cost Bush #1 the 92 election.
ZRX1200 Offline
#20 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 7:18 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,635
Oh no poor RHINO.

Anyone question rick perry's drug use now??
DrMaddVibe Offline
#21 Posted: Fri, Nov 11 2011, 8:10 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
wheelrite wrote:
Ross Perot cost Bush #1 the 92 election.



Nope.

Tellin' ya...look up what I said earlier.

There's n way a Prez with upper 70% approval ratings loses.
borndead1 Offline
#22 Posted: Sat, Nov 12 2011, 9:17 AM EST
Joined: 11-07-2006
Posts: 5,216
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Nope.

Tellin' ya...look up what I said earlier.

There's n way a Prez with upper 70% approval ratings loses.



Better be careful DMV...folks will start talking tin foil hats and black helicopters and stuff.
chiefburg Offline
#23 Posted: Sat, Nov 12 2011, 9:41 AM EST
Joined: 01-31-2005
Posts: 7,384
rfenst wrote:
Giuliani was a flop because he was clueless. He had popular appeal as an outsider, but no real political machine on the ground in each state.

McCain was the lesser of two evils for me, but he blew my already- shaky confidence by lying to Letterman (seriously), insisting on delaying the Republican Convention, and the way he "parachuted" in to and ran to Washington during the financial crisis in 2008. It didn't leave me with an impression that he would make calm, collected decisions. Obama came off as far more serious and McCain left me with the impression that he makes rash, uncalculated decisions- from the gut.

Obama, after a couple months of "soul searching", became the new lesser of two evils for me. Had things gone right however, I would have voted for Hillary without reservation.

The economy is historically interesting in that it was the real reason Bush1 lost re-election. It took a few more months than he had touted for it to come around from recession. Had it done so on time, Bush1 would have probably beat Bill Clinton. I really liked Bush1 as our President as I did with Reagan. Flaws aside, they still made me feel good as an American. The economy was great during Clinton. The trade deficit was down, social programs were fairly well funded and the dollar was strong. But, I cannot give Clinton all or too much of the credit for that. Economic cycles have lives of their own. Worldwide financial problems hurt everyone else- like Greece and Italy right now.

Anyhow, I have probably given too much fodder here for others to start making personal attacks, I do believe as of right now- Obama wins.


Wow, Robert......I tend to agree with most everything you said. I think we would have been better off with Hillary and I was pulling for her over Obama. I still believe she would have done things much different than Obama. I'm a conservative and even I didn't like a single Republican candidate as much as I liked Reagan. And, this election is heading straight down the toilet as well. Is this the best the Republicans can muster??? We are screwed....... Having said that, GW was elected because Gore and Kerry were the best the Dems could muster.....

I'm honestly beginning to think that our country is on it's last legs. The days of good, somewhat honest candidates who have a reasonable plan is long, long gone. In fact, I would take Ron Paul now in a heartbeat - at least he has a plan and he's not afraid to say what it is and accept the ridicule he gets for it.
bloody spaniard Offline
#24 Posted: Sat, Nov 12 2011, 10:29 AM EST
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
You're not alone in thinking this way, Chief.
We're the proverbial frog in the slowly heating water. As soon as it starts to boil within a year or two (higher interest rates), the howling will truly begin.
rfenst Offline
#25 Posted: Mon, Nov 14 2011, 10:34 AM EST
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,383
bloody spaniard wrote:
You're not alone in thinking this way, Chief.
We're the proverbial frog in the slowly heating water. As soon as it starts to boil within a year or two (higher interest rates), the howling will truly begin.


We have made it through much worse than this before and everything will be just fine in the long-run. Just not the same. Take a look at history concerning the recessions during the mid to late 70's and early 80s. Unemployment in some areas ranged between 15-20%; 7%+ inflation; prime rate and the like as high as 18%; and government food price controls. We permanently lost major industries (such as steel) to developing overseas competitors, who had cheaper labor. Banks and S&Ls failed at astonishing rates. Major industries failed. Stocks tanked. The federal government had to step in financially. And, somehow it all got straightened out...
DrMaddVibe Offline
#26 Posted: Mon, Nov 14 2011, 10:38 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
rfenst wrote:
And, somehow it all got straightened out...



It did?Eh?
bloody spaniard Offline
#27 Posted: Mon, Nov 14 2011, 10:42 AM EST
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
^ more like passed on to future generations...

Robert, the difference is that the debt load is barely manageable for EVERYONE (only sustainable due to low interest rates) & the line of credit valve is closing fast.
yardobeef Offline
#28 Posted: Mon, Nov 14 2011, 12:00 PM EST
Joined: 10-25-2011
Posts: 849
While I do worry about the current situation, especially because I have children, I take a little solace in the fact that this "We're teetering on the edge" rhetoric has been going for forever.

Heck, if you listen to political radio (dem and rep), every single election is by far the most important in our lives!
bloody spaniard Offline
#29 Posted: Mon, Nov 14 2011, 12:48 PM EST
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
yardobeef wrote:
While I do worry about the current situation, especially because I have children, I take a little solace in the fact that this "We're teetering on the edge" rhetoric has been going for forever.
Heck, if you listen to political radio (dem and rep), every single election is by far the most important in our lives!



I can appreciate your take on the hype from both sides, HOWEVER, this "teetering on the edge rhetoric" that has been going on "forever" according to you, is very real to those who live paycheck to paycheck, own small businesses, are unemployed (or under-employed) due to outsourcing, have families & dependents some of whom have health issues, etc.

NOT everyone has the perfect guaranteed job that allows them to post all day OR works for Wall Street, unions, Government, and/or receives a biweekly pension/subsidy checks from a broke Uncle Sugar who has to borrow from the Chinese.
Sarcasm
jackconrad Offline
#30 Posted: Mon, Nov 14 2011, 5:47 PM EST
Joined: 06-09-2003
Posts: 67,461
JOEPA FOR PRESIDENT!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#31 Posted: Tue, Nov 15 2011, 12:43 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,528
jackconrad wrote:
JOEPA FOR PRESIDENT OF BOYASS PEDDLERS!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top