User Panel
Posted: 7/23/2015 7:24:14 PM EDT
Apparently it's the new thing lately
|
|
Train derailment syndrome. We're watching you guys shoot yourselves in the foot again and can't help but bitch about it. You've done nothing but make conservatives look stupid and racist. Trump is working for the other team.
|
|
Quoted:
Train derailment syndrome. We're watching you guys shoot yourselves in the foot again and can't help but bitch about it. You've done nothing but make conservatives look stupid and racist. Trump is working for the other team. View Quote I'm not sure that there are two teams in Washington anymore. |
|
|
Not gonna lie, he was killing it on tv again a few minutes ago. I just wish it was a real person saying what he's saying. I'd be all in without question.
|
|
|
|
Quoted:
Apparently it's the new thing lately View Quote Admitting you have it gym is the first step towards recovery. Hang in there. |
|
So is the GOP leadership And they want Jeb They will attempt to crush Cruz, Walker, or Rand just like they are doing to Trump. Don't believe me? They have tried to railroad the likes of Cruz and Walker many previous times. Trump is the only one that has them shaking in their boots |
|
|
Quoted:
So is the GOP leadership And they want Jeb They will attempt to crush Cruz, Walker, or Rand just like they are doing to Trump Trump is the only one that has them shaking in their boots View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Liberalism is much, much worse Trump is a liberal. So is the GOP leadership And they want Jeb They will attempt to crush Cruz, Walker, or Rand just like they are doing to Trump Trump is the only one that has them shaking in their boots Got some evidence to support that? |
|
Quoted:
What gives money to Hillary, wants gun control, abortion and socialized medicine, has a bad comb over and can be made into lamp oil? http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j__CrB6_Scc/UIAQjzNF80I/AAAAAAAAJL8/t4G43EuhPDI/s1600/moby-dick-as-jaws.jpg View Quote Yep. As I recall moby gym has run a few anti-Walker threads as well. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Liberalism is much, much worse Trump is a liberal. So is the GOP leadership And they want Jeb They will attempt to crush Cruz, Walker, or Rand just like they are doing to Trump Trump is the only one that has them shaking in their boots Got some evidence to support that? Do a Google search for "GOP attacks Cruz" |
|
Quoted:
Yep. As I recall moby gym has run a few anti-Walker threads as well. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
What gives money to Hillary, wants gun control, abortion and socialized medicine, has a bad comb over and can be made into lamp oil? http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j__CrB6_Scc/UIAQjzNF80I/AAAAAAAAJL8/t4G43EuhPDI/s1600/moby-dick-as-jaws.jpg Yep. As I recall moby gym has run a few anti-Walker threads as well. I never started an anti-Walker thread. And I would gladly vote for him. Walker Rand Cruz The only ones that I would vote for |
|
Quoted:
Do a Google search for "GOP attacks Cruz" View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Liberalism is much, much worse Trump is a liberal. So is the GOP leadership And they want Jeb They will attempt to crush Cruz, Walker, or Rand just like they are doing to Trump Trump is the only one that has them shaking in their boots Got some evidence to support that? Do a Google search for "GOP attacks Cruz" Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? |
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? Sort of yes. The try to be anyhow. Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? |
|
Quoted:
I never started an anti-Walker thread. And I would gladly vote for him. Walker Rand Cruz The only ones that I would vote for View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What gives money to Hillary, wants gun control, abortion and socialized medicine, has a bad comb over and can be made into lamp oil? http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j__CrB6_Scc/UIAQjzNF80I/AAAAAAAAJL8/t4G43EuhPDI/s1600/moby-dick-as-jaws.jpg Yep. As I recall moby gym has run a few anti-Walker threads as well. I never started an anti-Walker thread. And I would gladly vote for him. Walker Rand Cruz The only ones that I would vote for If those are the only people you'd vote for, then can we get past this Trump nut hanging phase you seem to be stuck on? You're bad enough in the threads that mention your almighty Trump, but now you're starting them too? |
|
IMHO the last time there were two teams in DC was when Reagan was POTUS.
|
|
Quoted:
So is the GOP leadership And they want Jeb They will attempt to crush Cruz, Walker, or Rand just like they are doing to Trump. Don't believe me? They have tried to railroad the likes of Cruz and Walker many previous times. Trump is the only one that has them shaking in their boots View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Liberalism is much, much worse Trump is a liberal. So is the GOP leadership And they want Jeb They will attempt to crush Cruz, Walker, or Rand just like they are doing to Trump. Don't believe me? They have tried to railroad the likes of Cruz and Walker many previous times. Trump is the only one that has them shaking in their boots The ones that have them shaking in their boots are the ones that don't get air time. Wake up dude. |
|
Quoted:
Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? Sort of yes. The try to be anyhow. Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? the guys that bankroll it, the chamber of commerce who want open borders. |
|
|
I like that he speaks plainly, is not afraid to address issues and has definitely gotten people's attention. Maybe they will stay interested and actually vote this time. IF he is the R candidate I will vote for him. But I predict a flame out and auger in soon.
|
|
Quoted:
Speaking of which... https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/107976995/Pics/Politics/Trump%20Threads.JPG But by all means, let's not add a one-liner to any of those. No sir, it's new thread time! View Quote Will site staff lock Trump thread like they did Paul threads? |
|
Quoted: Apparently it's the new thing lately View Quote Some, like you, appear to be scared shitless of Trump, because he may upset your hopes for a "Jeb"/"Hillary" race. The same sort of lame ass thinking that made McCain the Republican candidate against Obama. That's loser thinking |
|
Quoted:
Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? Sort of yes. The try to be anyhow. Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? Did you follow any of the GOP convention in 2012? |
|
I
Quoted:
Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? Sort of yes. The try to be anyhow. Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? I have seen this in action at the state level. A certain Senator here and the leadership of the state GOP do everything in their power to stifle and silence people who are not in lock step with the Senator. Those that run for office and don't walk the line get no access to GOP funds whether they are running against other GOP members in the primary or Democrats in the general. |
|
|
Socialist Obama lovers coming out of the woodwork to demonize Trump...
Give 'em Hell Donald... |
|
Quoted:
Some, like you, appear to be scared shitless of Trump, because he may upset your hopes for a "Jeb"/"Hillary" race. The same sort of lame ass thinking that made McCain the Republican candidate against Obama. That's loser thinking View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Apparently it's the new thing lately Some, like you, appear to be scared shitless of Trump, because he may upset your hopes for a "Jeb"/"Hillary" race. The same sort of lame ass thinking that made McCain the Republican candidate against Obama. That's loser thinking You're kidding right? Trump is paving the way for a Bush/Clinton ticket. |
|
|
Quoted:
Did you follow any of the GOP convention in 2012? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? Sort of yes. The try to be anyhow. Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? Did you follow any of the GOP convention in 2012? Yes, please explain your point. Quoted:
I have seen this in action at the state level. A certain Senator here and the leadership of the state GOP do everything in their power to stifle and silence people who are not in lock step with the Senator. Those that run for office and don't walk the line get no access to GOP funds whether they are running against other GOP members in the primary or Democrats in the general. So there are no other competing interests that can be heard? Is this what happens at the national level? How does this apply to what the OP is talking about? |
|
Quoted:
Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? Sort of yes. The try to be anyhow. Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? Here, I googled it for you. http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12660-republican-convention-rules-changes-how-the-establishment-stole-the-gop . In order to make the nomination of Mitt Romney a fait accompli and to ensure that only those in his mold would ever carry the banner of the GOP, the RNC sacrificed adherence to its own rules on the altar of obedience to the Establishment.
In an exclusive conversation with The New American August 29, a longtime Republican activist recounted a tale that is at once incredible and unconscionable. Richard Engle has served the Republican Party in Oklahoma diligently since 1988. His role in moving the Sooner State to the political right cannot be overstated. He has represented Oklahoma in the Republican National Committee and has sat on the RNC’s standing committee on rules. Engle is intimately familiar with the proper Republican rules-making process — he has participated in it — and he recognizes how that process was hijacked by members of the Romney inner circle at the meeting of the Convention Rules Committee. Before rules are considered by the Republican Convention Rules Committee, they percolate up from proposals made by the state delegates of the Standing Rules Committee. This group of dedicated Republican officials meets three times a year to discuss suggested changes and prepare a draft of new rules to be considered by the Convention Rules Committee that meets every four years. Unlike the RNC’s Standing Rules Committee, the Republican National Convention Rules Committee (“Convention Rules Committee” for short) meets only once every four years and is composed of two delegates from each state (one man and one woman). These people are "good Republicans" and are unquestionably well-intentioned, but they often have little or no experience with the party’s rule-making procedures. This body is an ad hoc committee brought together for the sole purpose of receiving and reviewing the rule changes proposed by the standing committee. As the Convention Rules Committee met August 28, the Romney campaign lawyer, Ben Ginsberg, showed up and in the words of Engle, “pressured for significant and dramatic” changes to the party’s rules governing the binding of delegates and the way rules are to be revised in the future. According to the revised Rule 15 (to be renumbered as Rule 16 in the new rule book) as proposed by Ginsberg, every state must amend its nominating process to ensure that their delegations are bound to vote in accordance with the winner of the popular vote as cast at state caucuses or primaries. Ginsberg’s version of Rule 12 empowers the RNC to bend its own rules to suit their needs at any time without submitting the changes to party members gathered at the quadrennial convention. This unprecedented revision places the control of the GOP in the hands of the Establishment candidate without suffering the inconvenience of listening to dissenting voices. As Engle reckons, in the future the nomination of an incumbent Republican president is guaranteed and upon leaving office, he will be able to name his chosen successor through manipulation of the party rules. When it comes to all this “radical” rewriting, Engle admits that he doesn’t know whether Ginsberg acted on his own or on behalf of Governor Romney. He does know, however, that the sweeping revisions of Rules 12 and 15 (now 16) “changed the nature of the Republican Party and returned it to the smoke-filled rooms of the past.” So drastic were the revisions that Engle compared the convention to the Soviet Politburo, a sham with no more legitimate power than to rubber stamp their leaders’ directives. To their credit, Engle relates that upon hearing Ginsberg’s suggested rules changes the delegates on the Convention Rules Committee “of every stripe” reacted negatively. All of them realized that if the changes were adopted by the convention, the populist influence would be eliminated and all non-Establishment voices within the Republican Party would be silenced. Engle worries that the rules package proposed by Ginsberg would have the effect of putting “a certain type of party member in charge of the GOP.” Evidence of the delegates’ displeasure is found in the attempted filing of a Minority Report. According to Rule 34 of the Republican Party rules in effect at the August 28 meeting: No resolution or amendment pertaining to the report of the Committee on Resolutions or the Committee on Rules and Order of Business shall be reported out or made a part of any report of such committee or otherwise read or debated before the convention, unless the same shall have been submitted to the chairman, vice chairman, or secretary of such committee or to the secretary of the convention in writing not later than one hour after the time at which such committee votes on its report to the convention and shall have been accompanied by a petition evidencing the affirmative written support of a minimum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the membership of such committee. The Minority Report opposing the Romney lawyer’s rule changes was signed, sealed, but was never delivered. Curiously, the delegate in possession of the Minority Report was riding a bus denied entry to the Tampa Bay Times Forum. Virginia delegate Chris Stearns was on a bus of delegates blocked from stopping at the Convention. “They're keeping us all on a bus and not allowing us in the security perimeter,” Stearns posted on his Facebook page. Without a timely filed Minority Report, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) proceeded to call for a vote on Ginsberg’s rewrite of the Republican rulebook. Standing at the podium and reading from a teleprompter, Boehner instructed those in favor of the rules to say “aye” and those opposed to say “nay.” According to Engle, who was on the floor at the time, “in my hearing the ‘nays’ had it.” He admits the vote might have been close and as such Boehner should have called for a roll call vote rather than a voice vote. In another example of unexplained deviation from applicable Republican Party protocol, Boehner ignored the dissenting delegates for "division," which is a roll call vote. Whether it was the will of Mitt Romney or the independent work of one of his key counselors, Engle fears that the new rules governing the Republican Party’s method of selecting a presidential candidate nailed closed the coffin of the GOP. This week observers may be witnessing “the last Republican National Convention as we know it,” he added. A small coterie of Establishment Republicans have wrested control of the GOP and formed the mold into which any Republican wanting to run for president from now on must fit. |
|
Quoted:
Here, I googled it for you. http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12660-republican-convention-rules-changes-how-the-establishment-stole-the-gop View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are political parties monolithic entities? How does the primary process work? Sort of yes. The try to be anyhow. Please explain their structure in greater detail to me, and explain to me how through a competitive process that is supposed to pit a variety of interest within the party against one another there is some collusion within the leadership against one candidate in particular. Are you projecting intentionality and collusion within those you see in the news, or can you point to an actual organized agreement amongst "the leadership" to get rid of certain candidates? Who is this leadership that you guys speak of? Here, I googled it for you. http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12660-republican-convention-rules-changes-how-the-establishment-stole-the-gop Does that negate all competition? |
|
Quoted:
Some, like you, appear to be scared shitless of Trump, because he may upset your hopes for a "Jeb"/"Hillary" race. The same sort of lame ass thinking that made McCain the Republican candidate against Obama. That's loser thinking View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Apparently it's the new thing lately Some, like you, appear to be scared shitless of Trump, because he may upset your hopes for a "Jeb"/"Hillary" race. The same sort of lame ass thinking that made McCain the Republican candidate against Obama. That's loser thinking Agreed. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.