GOP Candidates

chrisisall

Number24 wrote:

Will his jewishnes be an obstacle for him, or perhaps the fact that he isn't religious?

The bible-nuts will not like him for that, but they're mostly barely literate & rarely vote anyways.

Number24

But seriously, religion plays a great part in US politics. Every president as long as I can remember has stressed their Christian beliefs. Sanders is not only a jew, but also (it seems) a non-relgious jew. Will this hurt him, or are the people who would take offence at this unlikely to vote for him anyway?

Loeffelholz

Religious people are barely literate.

How could anyone take offense?

chrisisall

Loeffelholz wrote:

Religious people are barely literate.

How could anyone take offense?

I said 'Bible-nuts'.
That's a far cry from 'religious'.

Ooops. I'm conversing with you. I'll stop.

Loeffelholz

I'd no idea there was such a broad distinction drawn between the two by the secular & atheist crowds (where Big Government is the One True Religion)

Number24

I don't think Chrisisall's comment about "bible-nuts" was ment to be serious, at least I didn't take it seriously. I would like Loeffelholz (or any other Americans) to comment on my question about Sanders and religion. Will the impression (for all I know he prays from time to time) that he is a non-religious hurt his chances to be the next president?

Loeffelholz

I doubt it; Sanders represents the secular/socialist demographic; those people certainly aren't looking for a religious candidate, IMO. My countless reasons for not voting for him have nothing to do with his faith, or lack thereof.

Number24

I suspect you are right (we are on a worrying streak ... ) ) about this. People who are potential Sanders voters are not likely to exclude a candidate because of his religion or lack thereoff.

Number24

Jim Gilmore is out.

Thunderpussy

So is he " Happy" about it ?

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

So is he " Happy" about it ?

Silly silly British man.
)

Number24

At least the Gilmore girls get to spend more time with him

chrisisall

Hey boys, this is a serious thread about the clowns in the GOP! Quit messing about!

chrisisall

And now that Supreme Court Justice Scalia has passed, watch the clowns of the GOP put on yet another circus trying to deny Obama's appointment of a next one. They are scared to death of a non-Conservative-thinking person getting in there. And once again, they are willing to bend the law to the breaking point to get what they want, like the whiny little babies they are. )

Higgins

Arghhh

Agreeing with Bruce Lee in 2 consecutive posts is painful

Loeffelholz

Democrats passed a resolution in 1960 to prevent Eisenhower from making recess Supreme Court nominations in an election year

Uncontrollable flatulence: the curse of the well-fed elite. For the love of God, somebody light a match. -{

Higgins

Well, point missed:

My agreement was more about the clowns and them stomping their feet and block everything - no matter what
Sincerely hope that your flatulences are soon getting better {[]

Loeffelholz

And yet again, you flatter yourself in assuming that I'm speaking to you, and not entirety of the Left-Wing Airbiscuit Thread (formerly known as GOP Candidates).

Higgins

Loeffelholz wrote:

Democrats passed a resolution in 1960 to prevent Eisenhower from making recess Supreme Court nominations in an election year

) ) so that was a general remark along he thread title and not a direct response to chris' comment to which I have agreed? :v

Seriously, Loeffs, let that hate fly
I still remember your nasty pms but have no ill feelings against you. Hope that you can see it the same way one day.

chrisisall

Nixon (2X), Ford & Reagan all nominated Justices before an election year (all confirmed as well). -{

Loeffelholz

And Republicans are not the first ones to play the obstructionist game; that's my only point. Democrat Chuck Schumer proposed blocking all Bush appointments in '07, as well, so let's have some intellectual honesty here.

Loeffelholz

Higgins wrote:

Loeffelholz wrote:

Democrats passed a resolution in 1960 to prevent Eisenhower from making recess Supreme Court nominations in an election year

) ) so that was a general remark along he thread title and not a direct response to chris' comment to which I have agreed? :v

Seriously, Loeffs, let that hate fly
I still remember your nasty pms but have no ill feelings against you. Hope that you can see it the same way one day.

Of course I was speaking to chris' post, 8-) but my remarks were aimed at all who simply come here to sneer down their noses at a set of beliefs and ridicule one party. That you are compelled to include yourself in a conversation with me is quite bemusing.

No hate here! That would indicate something deserving far more energy than you, my former friend. In the future, kindly remember that whatever I'm saying isn't directed at you, because it isn't. Narcissism doesn't become you.

chrisisall

Point taken concerning Schumer. {[]

Loeffelholz

chrisisall wrote:

Point taken. {[]

Cheers {[]

chrisisall

Personally, I say let the next President appoint the new justice; if it's Sanders all will be well. If it's anyone else we'll be going to Hell anyway, and that will hardly be a major concern at that point.

cheld

chrisisall wrote:

Nixon (2X), Ford & Reagan all nominated Justices before an election year (all confirmed as well). -{

Nixon nominees Powell and Rehnquist were confirmed in 1971. The election was in 1972.
Ford nominee Stevens was confirmed in 1975. The election was in 1976.
Reagan's nominees Bork (rejected), Ginsburg (withdrew) and Kennedy (confirmed) were all nominated in 1987. The election was in 1988.

chrisisall

cheld wrote:

chrisisall wrote:

Nixon (2X), Ford & Reagan all nominated Justices before an election year (all confirmed as well). -{

Nixon nominees Powell and Rehnquist were confirmed in 1971. The election was in 1972.
Ford nominee Stevens was confirmed in 1975. The election was in 1976.
Reagan's nominees Bork (rejected), Ginsburg (withdrew) and Kennedy (confirmed) were all nominated in 1987. The election was in 1988.

So a few months makes a huge difference? Oh.

Agent Purple

I think Cruz will win in SC and Bush in NV.

With regards to the Dem candidates, I think it'll be Sanders in NV and Hillary in SC.

Number24

I read George W. Bush has started campaigning for his brother. Can Jeb really be that desperate and can George really be a help to his campaign? I mean, even Trump understands that George was a disaster as a president

Number24

Loeffelholz wrote:

Democrats passed a resolution in 1960 to prevent Eisenhower from making recess Supreme Court nominations in an election year

Interesting and relevant. This is why this thread (and forum) needs a conserative American voice :007)