Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Dec 17, 2014 12:27:09 GMT -5
She'll run, and she'll win. The Democrats won't take back either the House or the Senate, however. As for this thread, it appears not everyone got their dose of "Hope and Change" from 2008. "Rand Paul is the man!"; he has a budget that works and he'll zero out that deficit. "Run Liz Run!"; she'll upend those Washington lobbyists and Wall Street fat cats. "Go Hillary!"; she'll bring back the boom times of the Clinton administration and right the ship. "We love Jeb!"; his investments in American innovation and technology will put Uncle Sam back on top. You're not illogical people. I suspect you've simply lived in the 20th century for too long. To you, the trend of the past 14 years is an exception that can be overcome rather than the harbinger of the New American Century. Or perhaps you've just chosen groundless optimism because the alternative provides no hope. I suppose one more go round might beat the "Hope and Change" out of you, so have at it. FWIW, my prediction is (and has been since the time Ms. Clinton claimed she wouldn't run) that Ms. Clinton would run for--and win--the Democratic nomination, and go on to win the 2016 presidency in a race against (my prediction since the 2013 hurricanes) Gov. Christie. Does any of this matter? No. Will that fact stop you from endlessly discussing, panning, plugging, and dissecting the candidates? No. I know you have fun doing it. I won't begrudge you that. It's just sad, is all. Democrats will almost definitely take back the Senate in 2016. i would put the odds well north of 90%. the House is a tougher slog, but they have a good shot. maybe 60%? too early to tell. of course, if you get your wish, and the economy is in a death spiral, all bets are off. ok, gotta go. happy holidays! dj, when you have the time, which state Republican Senate seats will fall to the Dems in 2016?
IF the Republicans have a good ticket in 2016, I do not see it happening.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Dec 17, 2014 12:27:46 GMT -5
not sure whether i said it would be a big issue for him. i merely stated that it will still be there. but let me state something else: until the issue has passed, there will be a cloud hanging over him, innocent or not. I think the cloud has already passed. Just a little white fluff in the sky at this point subject to change in the next couple years of course. It will come back around big time during the nomination process. Whether or not it bites him in the ass, we shall see. But, I see it being a huge issue during the campaign.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 12:31:04 GMT -5
i think you are wrong, and i also think that i have followed this story closer than you. but that is all the time i have for it today. Then post some links rather than insinuate you know something I don't. As time allows of course.
i said that i THINK i have followed it more closely than you. if you disagree, great. i don't give a crap. my point is this: i think Christie has some baggage that the other candidates don't have. whether he was PERSONALLY involved or not is immaterial. the people HE HIRED AND TRUSTED were involved. in the best case scenario, he is a terrible manager. rather like Bush in that respect. if you want to vote for him, bully for you. but i don't. and i think a lot of others will feel the same. i am not going to post any more on the subject of Christie until election season. we will have a better idea of whether he can survive this or not, then. i seriously doubt he will survive it, however. he has run a very corrupt admin, imo. that doesn't reflect well on him. so, no links, here. i am tired of this story. i simply think Christie's chances of winning the nomination are quite small. unlike his ego and his mouth.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 12:32:32 GMT -5
Democrats will almost definitely take back the Senate in 2016. i would put the odds well north of 90%. the House is a tougher slog, but they have a good shot. maybe 60%? too early to tell. of course, if you get your wish, and the economy is in a death spiral, all bets are off. ok, gotta go. happy holidays! dj, when you have the time, which state Republican Senate seats will fall to the Dems in 2016?
IF the Republicans have a good ticket in 2016, I do not see it happening.
i don't think it has anything to do with candidates, VB. it has to do with demographics. look, we have talked about this a billion times. do you never get tired of it? i do.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 12:33:18 GMT -5
really, seriously. gotta go. ciao!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 12:58:48 GMT -5
I think the cloud has already passed. Just a little white fluff in the sky at this point subject to change in the next couple years of course. It will come back around big time during the nomination process. Whether or not it bites him in the ass, we shall see. But, I see it being a huge issue during the campaign. Could be.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 13:04:54 GMT -5
Then post some links rather than insinuate you know something I don't. As time allows of course.
i said that i THINK i have followed it more closely than you. if you disagree, great. i don't give a crap. my point is this: i think Christie has some baggage that the other candidates don't have. whether he was PERSONALLY involved or not is immaterial. the people HE HIRED AND TRUSTED were involved. in the best case scenario, he is a terrible manager. rather like Bush in that respect. if you want to vote for him, bully for you. but i don't. and i think a lot of others will feel the same. i am not going to post any more on the subject of Christie until election season. we will have a better idea of whether he can survive this or not, then. i seriously doubt he will survive it, however. he has run a very corrupt admin, imo. that doesn't reflect well on him. so, no links, here. i am tired of this story. i simply think Christie's chances of winning the nomination are quite small. unlike his ego and his mouth. I didn't say I disagreed. I'm asking to see what you are following. I didn't say I wanted to vote for him either. No links . Got it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 13:50:11 GMT -5
i said that i THINK i have followed it more closely than you. if you disagree, great. i don't give a crap. my point is this: i think Christie has some baggage that the other candidates don't have. whether he was PERSONALLY involved or not is immaterial. the people HE HIRED AND TRUSTED were involved. in the best case scenario, he is a terrible manager. rather like Bush in that respect. if you want to vote for him, bully for you. but i don't. and i think a lot of others will feel the same. i am not going to post any more on the subject of Christie until election season. we will have a better idea of whether he can survive this or not, then. i seriously doubt he will survive it, however. he has run a very corrupt admin, imo. that doesn't reflect well on him. so, no links, here. i am tired of this story. i simply think Christie's chances of winning the nomination are quite small. unlike his ego and his mouth. I didn't say I disagreed. I'm asking to see what you are following. I didn't say I wanted to vote for him either. No links . Got it.
i am not going to provide links for a point i was not trying to make, sweetheart. ever. we clear?
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Dec 17, 2014 14:14:20 GMT -5
dj, when you have the time, which state Republican Senate seats will fall to the Dems in 2016?
IF the Republicans have a good ticket in 2016, I do not see it happening.
i don't think it has anything to do with candidates, VB. it has to do with demographics. look, we have talked about this a billion times. do you never get tired of it? i do. Well, list the states where the Republicans are going down in 2016 Senate races, and we can discuss.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 14:21:48 GMT -5
I didn't say I disagreed. I'm asking to see what you are following. I didn't say I wanted to vote for him either. No links . Got it.
i am not going to provide links for a point i was not trying to make, sweetheart. ever. we clear? Oh yah, I totally "get" you. Thanks
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 14:27:09 GMT -5
i am not going to provide links for a point i was not trying to make, sweetheart. ever. we clear? Oh yah, I totally "get" you. Thanks
if you got me, then why did you ask me to prove that Christie was involved, when i never made that claim? let me be clear: what i claimed is that Bridgegate is still going on. what i claimed is that the ADMINISTRATION of Christie has shown a lot of misconduct in this, for reasons that are absolutely unclear (the WHYS are still unknown at this time, and personally, i would really like to know). and what i CLAIMED is that this tarnishes Christie as a candidate. did you get that?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 14:28:50 GMT -5
i don't think it has anything to do with candidates, VB. it has to do with demographics. look, we have talked about this a billion times. do you never get tired of it? i do. Well, list the states where the Republicans are going down in 2016 Senate races, and we can discuss. i will be starting a thread on this in January. not a joke. but here is a preview for your consideration: think about 2010. that is what you need to do. just think about it. that is all you are getting for now.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Dec 17, 2014 14:34:40 GMT -5
Well, list the states where the Republicans are going down in 2016 Senate races, and we can discuss. i will be starting a thread on this in January. not a joke. but here is a preview for your consideration: think about 2010. that is what you need to do. just think about it. that is all you are getting for now. thanks!
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Dec 17, 2014 14:36:42 GMT -5
Oh yah, I totally "get" you. Thanks
if you got me, then why did you ask me to prove that Christie was involved, when i never made that claim? let me be clear: what i claimed is that Bridgegate is still going on. what i claimed is that the ADMINISTRATION of Christie has shown a lot of misconduct in this, for reasons that are absolutely unclear (the WHYS are still unknown at this time, and personally, i would really like to know). and what i CLAIMED is that this tarnishes Christie as a candidate. did you get that? dj, I do not intend to supply links either, but Christie has been cleared several times of anything to do with Bridgegate. If you simply mean underlings, of his in the Administration, I will accept your premise.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 14:38:51 GMT -5
if you got me, then why did you ask me to prove that Christie was involved, when i never made that claim? let me be clear: what i claimed is that Bridgegate is still going on. what i claimed is that the ADMINISTRATION of Christie has shown a lot of misconduct in this, for reasons that are absolutely unclear (the WHYS are still unknown at this time, and personally, i would really like to know). and what i CLAIMED is that this tarnishes Christie as a candidate. did you get that? dj, I do not intend to supply links either, but Christie has been cleared several times of anything to do with Bridgegate. If you simply mean underlings, of his in the Administration, I will accept your premise.
i never claimed he was directly responsible, for the third time in four posts (and for the hundreds of posts i have made on the subject). what i claimed is written above. posting links to provide proof of something i never claimed is f(*king stupid. however, i don't like the term "underlings". these are people very close to Christie, and they are still in a ton of hot water. that is going to last a while. if he survives it, i would be very surprised. if you don't like the word "misconduct", try the term "poor judgment" or "mismanagement".
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Dec 17, 2014 14:47:50 GMT -5
dj, I do not intend to supply links either, but Christie has been cleared several times of anything to do with Bridgegate. If you simply mean underlings, of his in the Administration, I will accept your premise.
i never claimed he was directly responsible, for the third time in four posts (and for the hundreds of posts i have made on the subject). what i claimed is written above. posting links to provide proof of something i never claimed is f(*king stupid. however, i don't like the term "underlings". these are people very close to Christie, and they are still in a ton of hot water. that is going to last a while. if he survives it, i would be very surprised. if you don't like the word "misconduct", try the term "poor judgment" or "mismanagement". Most ordinary citizens equate "Administration" with the person in charge, so when you use the term many here may misconstrue your musing. I admit I fell into that camp, that is why I asked. I know this is not your fault, but perception of the post is reality.
As far as Christie being the Presidential nominee, I do not expect it.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 17, 2014 17:48:10 GMT -5
Um, no.
We need to stop arguing over who can do statism better.
By rights the GOP should be trying to mitigate the massive defeat they're about to suffer in 2016. My prediction (you know what that's worth, I know) is that the crushing defeat of the GOP in 2016 is going to be one for the history books. I predict they lose the House, Senate, and White House.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 20:24:59 GMT -5
Um, no. We need to stop arguing over who can do statism better. By rights the GOP should be trying to mitigate the massive defeat they're about to suffer in 2016. My prediction (you know what that's worth, I know) is that the crushing defeat of the GOP in 2016 is going to be one for the history books. I predict they lose the House, Senate, and White House. i think this prediction is pretty close. but i don't think they will get smashed. i think the House will be competitive, they will lose the senate, and they will very likely lose the presidency. i would feel differently if i saw a visible popular candidate out there in my party.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 21:00:19 GMT -5
She'll run, and she'll win. The Democrats won't take back either the House or the Senate, however. As for this thread, it appears not everyone got their dose of "Hope and Change" from 2008. "Rand Paul is the man!"; he has a budget that works and he'll zero out that deficit. "Run Liz Run!"; she'll upend those Washington lobbyists and Wall Street fat cats. "Go Hillary!"; she'll bring back the boom times of the Clinton administration and right the ship. "We love Jeb!"; his investments in American innovation and technology will put Uncle Sam back on top. You're not illogical people. I suspect you've simply lived in the 20th century for too long. To you, the trend of the past 14 years is an exception that can be overcome rather than the harbinger of the New American Century. Or perhaps you've just chosen groundless optimism because the alternative provides no hope. I suppose one more go round might beat the "Hope and Change" out of you, so have at it. FWIW, my prediction is (and has been since the time Ms. Clinton claimed she wouldn't run) that Ms. Clinton would run for--and win--the Democratic nomination, and go on to win the 2016 presidency in a race against (my prediction since the 2013 hurricanes) Gov. Christie. Does any of this matter? No. Will that fact stop you from endlessly discussing, panning, plugging, and dissecting the candidates? No. I know you have fun doing it. I won't begrudge you that. It's just sad, is all. Democrats will almost definitely take back the Senate in 2016. i would put the odds well north of 90%. the House is a tougher slog, but they have a good shot. maybe 60%? too early to tell. of course, if you get your wish, and the economy is in a death spiral, all bets are off. ok, gotta go. happy holidays! I think that depends on how well the current make-up of the Senate works... the one that starts in January, I mean. If they send stuff that the American Public wants/likes to the President... even if he Vetoes it... they will be seen as doing what the American Public want. That will allow the Republicans to keep their Majority... even if nothing actually gets done, because then they can blame it all on "Obstructionist Obama" using the "Well... we did send everything up as far as we could!" defense for the failures.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 22:39:31 GMT -5
Democrats will almost definitely take back the Senate in 2016. i would put the odds well north of 90%. the House is a tougher slog, but they have a good shot. maybe 60%? too early to tell. of course, if you get your wish, and the economy is in a death spiral, all bets are off. ok, gotta go. happy holidays! I think that depends on how well the current make-up of the Senate works... the one that starts in January, I mean. i predicted that the GOP would win this year in 2012. it wasn't that hard. neither is 2016. it doesn't really depend on anything other than voting patterns. but i can see you don't like providential thinking, which is why i laid odds. i give the GOP a 10% chance of retaining the Senate. if the Obama administration is as much of a disaster as you say, it should be no problem for them to make good on those very long odds.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 22:43:50 GMT -5
If they send stuff that the American Public wants/likes to the President... even if he Vetoes it... they will be seen as doing what the American Public want. That will allow the Republicans to keep their Majority... even if nothing actually gets done, because then they can blame it all on "Obstructionist Obama" using the "Well... we did send everything up as far as we could!" defense for the failures. again, i don't think who wins in congress has very much to do with politics any more. the rift of partisanship is so deep that half the electorate (the half that is MOST motivated to vote) would never change parties- EVER. they would sell their soul first. that leaves the half that are less likely to vote. they are a bad group to hitch your wagon to, in my experience.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 22:45:01 GMT -5
I think that depends on how well the current make-up of the Senate works... the one that starts in January, I mean. i predicted that the GOP would win this year in 2012. it wasn't that hard. neither is 2016. it doesn't really depend on anything other than voting patterns. but i can see you don't like providential thinking, which is why i laid odds. i give the GOP a 10% chance of retaining the Senate. if the Obama administration is as much of a disaster as you say, it should be no problem for them to make good on those very long odds. The disaster that is the Obama administration isn't what will sway the future of Congress one way or the other. The actions (or inactions) of Congress itself are what will do that. Just like it did for this most recent vote. The Democrats lost the Senate because the American voters didn't like the job they did.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 22:47:24 GMT -5
If they send stuff that the American Public wants/likes to the President... even if he Vetoes it... they will be seen as doing what the American Public want. That will allow the Republicans to keep their Majority... even if nothing actually gets done, because then they can blame it all on "Obstructionist Obama" using the "Well... we did send everything up as far as we could!" defense for the failures. again, i don't think who wins in congress has very much to do with politics any more. the rift of partisanship is so deep that half the electorate (the half that is MOST motivated to vote) would never change parties- EVER. they would sell their soul first. that leaves the half that are less likely to vote. they are a bad group to hitch your wagon to, in my experience. If they "would never change parties- EVER"... they've already sold their souls. But, in general, I agree that "hitching your hopes on the half that are less likely to vote" is a bad option.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 22:52:29 GMT -5
i predicted that the GOP would win this year in 2012. it wasn't that hard. neither is 2016. it doesn't really depend on anything other than voting patterns. but i can see you don't like providential thinking, which is why i laid odds. i give the GOP a 10% chance of retaining the Senate. if the Obama administration is as much of a disaster as you say, it should be no problem for them to make good on those very long odds. The disaster that is the Obama administration isn't what will sway the future of Congress one way or the other. The actions (or inactions) of Congress itself are what will do that. Just like it did for this most recent vote. The Democrats lost the Senate because the American voters didn't like the job they did. no, Democrats lost congress because their voters are utterly disillusioned. they don't believe in local politics at all. nor should they.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 22:54:50 GMT -5
Richard- have you heard Russell Brand speak recently? i think he expresses the view of the average "apathetic" voter. if you have not heard him, i can post something here.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 23:01:50 GMT -5
Richard- have you heard Russell Brand speak recently? i think he expresses the view of the average "apathetic" voter. if you have not heard him, i can post something here. I know who he is, but haven't heard any of his political speaking... not that I can recall anyway.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 23:17:09 GMT -5
Richard- have you heard Russell Brand speak recently? i think he expresses the view of the average "apathetic" voter. if you have not heard him, i can post something here. I know who he is, but haven't heard any of his political speaking... not that I can recall anyway. don't think he reflects my views, generally speaking. i am wealthy, so i am actually against upsetting the apple cart. but i think the sentiments revealed here are at least part, if not most of the views of those that are apathetic. i know that when i was living out of the shop and making $3.50 per hour doing it (and having to give $1,000 of that to the federal government for the privilege of being self employed) in 1992, i felt like my vote meant very little.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 23:25:28 GMT -5
That was a good "bit"... even if I think I need a drink or a bong hit after listening to him talk... LOL
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,352
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 17, 2014 23:29:33 GMT -5
That was a good "bit"... even if I think I need a drink or a bong hit after listening to him talk... LOL he is actually very articulate and clear headed, which is, i hate to say, more than most of the apathetic voters can say. i think most people have a vague idea that the system is not working for them, but Russell sees all of that and far more. he is quite dangerous. but fortunately, people are so enured, so placated, and so busy in their lives that they will probably never hear the message that he is trying to convey. he is quite naiive to expect otherwise, if he actually expects it. but somehow, i don't think he is all that hopeful.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 19, 2024 19:03:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 23:35:41 GMT -5
It was all of his moving around that got to me... not his speaking or points. I got tired just WATCHING him.
|
|