|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Huckabee | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
obvious Child Member (Idle past 4116 days) Posts: 661 Joined: |
Aside from how Iowa essentially does not matter, what do you guys think of him?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5930 Joined: Member Rating: 5.8 |
If he gets the Republican nomination, then he should prove to be their death knoll. And deservedly so.
But if they manage to steal the election for the third frakking time in a row! Then kiss it all good-bye. We are toast! We are history! {When you search for God, y}ou can't go to the people who believe already. They've made up their minds and want to convince you of their own personal heresy. ("The Jehovah Contract", AKA "Der Jehova-Vertrag", by Viktor Koman, 1984) Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the world. (from filk song "Word of God" by Dr. Catherine Faber, No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML) Of course, if Dr. Mortimer's surmise should be correct and we are dealing with forces outside the ordinary laws of Nature, there is an end of our investigation. But we are bound to exhaust all other hypotheses before falling back upon this one.(Sherlock Holmes in The Hound of the Baskervilles) Gentry's case depends upon his halos remaining a mystery. Once a naturalistic explanation is discovered, his claim of a supernatural origin is washed up. So he will not give aid or support to suggestions that might resolve the mystery. Science works toward an increase in knowledge; creationism depends upon a lack of it. Science promotes the open-ended search; creationism supports giving up and looking no further. It is clear which method Gentry advocates.("Gentry's Tiny Mystery -- Unsupported by Geology" by J. Richard Wakefield, Creation/Evolution Issue XXII, Winter 1987-1988, pp 31-32)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
obvious Child Member (Idle past 4116 days) Posts: 661 Joined: |
quote: Is that a bad thing? If Huck wins the nomination, it's a sign that the GOP no longer cares about anything other then religious conservatism. Maybe then the libertarian/fiscal conservatives will be fed up enough to leave the party? Personally, I don't think Huck will win the primary though. Even though the grip of the religious evangelicals is tight, the financial clout of many business oriented Republicans will prevent Mr. Big Spending + Taxes from grabbing the nomination. But we are 'toast' as we know it if a big spending liberal with a extremely socially conservative agenda wins the General. Four years of someone worse then Dubya? Yikes. That would be a good poll, would you rather have dubya or huck or a bullet to the brain?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3941 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Caucuses require much more effort than just showing up at your convenience to vote. My impression is that the caucus system brings out the hard-core, which might be an extreme position voter.
For the Republicans, does that mean the most reactionary? For the Democrats, does that mean the most progressive? My guess is yes for both. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 836 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
obvious child writes: But we are 'toast' as we know it if a big spending liberal with a extremely socially conservative agenda wins the General. Four years of someone worse then Dubya? How could anyone spend more, increase the size of government more, or have less fiscal responsibility, than a modern Reagan-Bush Republican? They squander more money than a crack whore. How could anyone be worse than Bush? I didn't know Buchanan or Pierce were running. Today, liberal means responsible small government. The KGB and Praetorian Guard (Blackwater/Haliburton) cost a lot of money. Don't believe me, ask the former Soviet Union. Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Caucuses require much more effort than just showing up at your convenience to vote. I think I might know what you mean, but I have little confidence. Ashamedly I'm rather ignorant on this point, could you explain your thinking?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
The once great Republican party is in shambles.
This might have been as much a vote against Romney as it was for Huckabee.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
actually, they discussed the caucussing system yesterday. only the democratic caucus is complicated. the republicans show up, talk about who they like and why, and then write it on a piece of paper and leave. there's not waiting to see if a candidate is viable and reshuffling.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
the democratic caucus process is, you show up and declare who you're voting for. they shuffle you into groups based on this. then they count and make sure that the candidates being voted for are "viable", that is they have some set minimum percentage of the vote. if they don't, they are eliminated and the people who were voting for that candidate choose a second choice. this is why obama was speaking the other day and asking to be people's second choice as well.
the republican system is much simpler. you show up and everyone discusses who they want and why then people write up a paper ballot and mail it in.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
i'm not really worried he'll actually be elected, but if he were, i think the US would become a very strange and terrifying place. but then again, the last time his state's school system needed more money, the bill to increase the taxes was passed and he signed it without question or micromanaging. so who knows.
it's generally safe to say that after a few years have passed and the next guy is in office, almost everything seems less awful than it did when it was happening, and the doom-sayers are never really right.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
For someone that has hinted that god wanted him to win, I think he alienated a lot of moderate conservatives. If he actually wins the nomination, I'm going to start packing. If he actually wins the election, I'm moving to Canada.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Taz writes: If he actually wins the election, I'm moving to Canada. We do have standards you know.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LinearAq Member (Idle past 4676 days) Posts: 598 From: Pocomoke City, MD Joined: |
Christian Conservatives are starting to rally around him, Pat Robertson's recommendations be damned. Iowa republicans are typically quite conservative so this may not be indicative of the entire primary process for him.
However, the early lead may cause other conservatives to jump on his bandwagon. Many voters want to feel like they are backing a winner. All of the following quotes are from his website: His policies? Anti-abortion to the point where he is for a constitutional amendment to ensure the rights of the unborn. (See Ringo, it could happen. )
quote: Anti-gay marriage....constitutional amendment again.
quote: Fight the war in Iraq until "victory" He wants to revoke the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy of the military concerning homosexuals and ban them from military service. Religious convictions.
quote: I think that pretty much says it all. I guess freedom for him means "free to do what my religion tells you is right". Edited by LinearAq, : Emphasis within a quote
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
If Huckabee actually manages to become President of the U.S., I will accept that as proof that Satan exists and wants to bring about the end of the world. (I came close to this when GWB was
He fought for the South for no reason that he could now recall, other than the same one all men fought for: because he'd been a damn fool. -- Garth Ennis
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
It appears from his website that he's pretty much of a conservative, i.e. to conserve the standards for the nation that the founders installed, employed and envisioned for the future. These standards are the ones which have made the nation the world's most blessed, where freedom has rang for the first two centuries.
ABE: The really dangerous one, the ultra-liberal Obama who's principle spiritual mentor is a pro black Muslim Louis Farrakan lubber and who advocates a whole lot of what our founders (abe: would oppose) is the one the folks should be concerned about. The ultra left militant sector of the black community will for sure be backing him. At this point I'm not sure who I'm going to favor but it's obvious which of the two Iowa winners are more dangerous and risky for America! Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given. Edited by Buzsaw, : clarify BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024