Courtesy of Politico:
So does Stein, with the benefit of hindsight, have any regrets? “I don’t think so,” she tells me by phone from her home in Lexington, Massachusetts. Decrying “fake news,” citing the “sabotage of Bernie Sanders” and talking up the “tremendous” campaign she could have run with more money, Stein is projecting a Trump-worthy level of defiance. “I consider it a great honor that the party and our prior campaign for president is suddenly being attacked outside of an election season,” she says.
Those attacks aren’t merely sour grapes from a party still reeling from its stunning defeat in November. Some Democrats would like to see Stein hauled in front of Congress to explain mysteries like what, exactly, she was doing at a 2015 Moscow gala thrown by a Russian state-owned broadcaster—the same RT event that got Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, in such trouble.
“We're certainly interested in any efforts the Russians made to influence our election,” says California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, which is investigating Russia’s alleged meddling in the election. “There have been public reports, I think, that Jill Stein was also in Russia attending the RT function, so we’re going to need to look at any efforts the Russians made through whatever means to influence our elections."
Stein didn’t just attend the gala—dressed in a shimmering silver shawl, she sat at the same table as Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has barely disguised his glee at the political chaos that what he calls “patriotic” Russian hackers have unleashed in the United States. And she recorded a video from Moscow’s famous Red Square, in which she talked about “the need to rein in American exceptionalism” and replace “a U.S. policy based on domination”—words that sounded like they were ripped from Putin’s talking points.
Stein isn’t sorry about any of it. She says she’d welcome the opportunity to testify before Congress and dismisses the idea that she was a spoiler or that her campaign was co-opted as a tool of Russian influence as Democrats’ “pathetic excuses” for losing the election.
Well she seems nice.
And don;t think that Stein is some outlier among Green Party folks either, get a load of what the Green Party's Michigan Chairwoman had to say:
“In some ways, Trump is one of the best things to happen to this country because look at how many people are getting off their posteriors,” says Sherry Wells, the Green Party’s Michigan chairwoman. “So part of me is giggling.”
Americans, she reasons, would be hypocritical for crying foul over foreign meddling in their political system. “I am so comforted to hear that the United States never interfered in the election of other countries,” cracks Wells, who volunteers that she is fluent in Esperanto.
I personally have never been a fan of third party candidates, and I was quick to dismiss Jill Stein during the 2016 election.
But now I'm beginning to wonder if there is not something a little more subversive going on here.
Morality is not determined by the church you attend nor the faith you embrace. It is determined by the quality of your character and the positive impact you have on those you meet along your journey
Showing posts with label third party candidate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label third party candidate. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 20, 2017
Green party candidate Jill Stein has no regrets about potentially helping Donald Trump win the presidency, calls claims that her campaign was co-opted by Russians "pathetic excuses" by the Democrats.
Labels:
2016,
Donald Trump,
Green Party,
Jill Stein,
Politico,
politics,
Putin,
Russia,
third party candidate
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
John Oliver eviscerates the third party candidates competing in this election cycle, with some very uncomfortable facts.
Well I've been earning about third party candidates for several months now, and also pointing out their various flaws, but leave to John Oliver to take it to a new level while also making it laugh out loud funny.
Just the sound of Jill Stein singing alone is enough for me to dismiss her out of hand.
Can she not hear herself?
However I might give that Joe Exotic a second look just because I am impressed with a partially crippled southern gay man who stands fearlessly in a cage with lions and tigers as if they are simply over sized house cats.
That seems like the kind of guy that might scare the shit out of Vladimir Putin.
Just the sound of Jill Stein singing alone is enough for me to dismiss her out of hand.
Can she not hear herself?
However I might give that Joe Exotic a second look just because I am impressed with a partially crippled southern gay man who stands fearlessly in a cage with lions and tigers as if they are simply over sized house cats.
That seems like the kind of guy that might scare the shit out of Vladimir Putin.
Labels:
2016,
Gary Johnson,
Green Party,
HBO,
John Oliver,
Libertarians,
politics,
Presidency,
third party candidate,
YouTube
Saturday, October 08, 2016
Former Ralph Nader supporters warn third party voters to learn from their mistake.
| Seriously did you people learn nothing? |
The Huffington Post spoke with Nader voters who have since figured out that the best way to fix the two-party system is to join it. They’ve worked in Democratic politics for years ― some as penance for what they did in 2000 ― and they worry that Stein voters are going to be making the same mistake they did with Nader.
“If you think there’s no difference between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, then you’re not paying attention,” said Joe Rospars, who was the chief digital strategist for both of Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns and voted for Nader in Virginia when he was 19. “I don’t think that I’m just an old person now saying what an old person would have said to me 16 years ago. ... Voting for Jill Stein in a battleground state or Gary Johnson for any reason is just not a useful way to operate the electoral system.”
Nader took 2.7 percent of the vote in 2000, and there’s been a national argument ever since over whether he cost Gore the election. He received nearly 100,000 votes in Florida, a state in which Bush beat Gore by only 537 votes.
People who went for Nader in 2000 have done their own soul-searching over the years, with plenty of accusations from friends that they led to things like the Iraq War.
“Those of us who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000, most of us, if we had to do it over again, would not do it,” said Kurt Ehrenberg, 58, who served as Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) New Hampshire political director but now solidly backs Clinton. “You feel, in some small way, responsible for all this stuff that George W. Bush was able to do because he was elected president ― even though it was the closest race in my lifetime and there’s still some question as to whether, if all the votes had been counted, Bush would’ve won.”
I have been waiting for these folks to show up in this election cycle and talk some sense into those third party dipshits.
After all it was the 2000 election that turned me off to third party candidates in the first place.
First off, they are NEVER going to be elected.
Second their only purpose is to help one side or the other by stealing votes from their opponent.
And third don't give me that "protest vote" bullshit.
If you cast a vote for a third party candidate the only thing you are protesting is the lack of oxygen making it to your brain. You essentially knock yourself down a notch, from barely useful to the political system to completely insignificant.
Congratulations.
Labels:
2000,
2016,
election,
Huffington Post,
politics,
Ralph Nader,
third party candidate
For those still thinking about voting for Gary Johnson.
I swear I think that if the majority of the people who dislike Hillary Clinton actually knew the truth about her, instead of gobbling up the steady stream of bullshit about her online, they would not only vote for her but volunteer to work on her campaign.Self-professed liberals who prefer Gary Johnson because he's not Hillary Clinton...I mean, lol pic.twitter.com/cM8oZre9y2— Kate Oh (@kathoh) September 21, 2016
Labels:
2016,
election,
Gary Johnson,
Libertarians,
politics,
Presidency,
third party candidate,
Twitter
Thursday, September 29, 2016
President Obama comes right out and says that not voting or voting for a third party candidate is a vote for Donald Trump.
Courtesy of Politico:
President Barack Obama on Wednesday warned Americans against staying at home on Election Day, saying such a move would be a boon for Donald Trump. “If you don’t vote, that’s a vote for Trump,” Obama said during an interview on “The Steve Harvey Morning Show” broadcast Wednesday.
“If you vote for a third-party candidate who’s got no chance to win, that’s a vote for Trump. So the notion somehow that, ‘Well, you know, I’m not as inspired because Barack and Michelle, they’re not on the ballot this time, and, you know, maybe we kinda take it easy’ — my legacy’s on the ballot. You know, all the work we’ve done over the last eight years is on the ballot.”
I have been saying this as well, though of course my words do not carry the same weight as the President's.
However it is inarguable that voting "your conscience" for some third party candidate that can make every promise imaginable because they know they will never be in position to deliver on them, or staying home to pout because your fantasy candidate is not on the ballot, essentially makes you Donald Trump's bitch.
And this is election it simply too important for people to be that ignorant or that selfish.
The First Lady, is coming out strong on behalf of Hillary, kind of puts things into perspective:
First Lady Michelle Obama tore into Donald Trump Wednesday, telling Hillary Clinton supporters, "We need an adult in the White House."
"When making life-or-death, war-or-peace decisions, a president can't just pop off or lash out irrationally," she said on behalf of the Democratic presidential nominee at La Salle University in Philadelphia. "We need an adult in the White House. I guarantee you."
Obama criticized Trump over his spreading of the birther conspiracy theory, continuing a rebuke she first made earlier this month while stumping for Clinton in Virginia.
"There are those who questioned and continue to question for the past eight years whether my husband was even born in this country," Obama said to boos. "And let me say: hurtful, deceitful questions deliberately designed to undermine his presidency. Questions that cannot be blamed on others or swept under the rug by an insincere sentence uttered at a press conference."
"So if a candidate is erratic and threatening, if a candidate traffics in prejudice, fear and lies on the campaign trail, if a candidate thinks that not paying taxes makes you smart or that it's good business when people lose their homes, if a candidate regularly and flippantly makes cruel and insulting comments about women -- about how we look, how we act -- well, sadly, that's who that candidate really is," she said.
Yeah this is not an election featuring two capable politicians with partisan disagreements, this is essentially a contest between an adult more than qualified for the job, and an infant spreading feces all over the walls whenever he does not get his way.
And if after seeing that debate on Monday people are still having trouble deciding who should be in the White House I really think they are due for a mental health check.
Simply put it is time for everybody to put on their big boy (or girl) pants and do the right thing for the future of this country.
President Barack Obama on Wednesday warned Americans against staying at home on Election Day, saying such a move would be a boon for Donald Trump. “If you don’t vote, that’s a vote for Trump,” Obama said during an interview on “The Steve Harvey Morning Show” broadcast Wednesday.
“If you vote for a third-party candidate who’s got no chance to win, that’s a vote for Trump. So the notion somehow that, ‘Well, you know, I’m not as inspired because Barack and Michelle, they’re not on the ballot this time, and, you know, maybe we kinda take it easy’ — my legacy’s on the ballot. You know, all the work we’ve done over the last eight years is on the ballot.”
I have been saying this as well, though of course my words do not carry the same weight as the President's.
However it is inarguable that voting "your conscience" for some third party candidate that can make every promise imaginable because they know they will never be in position to deliver on them, or staying home to pout because your fantasy candidate is not on the ballot, essentially makes you Donald Trump's bitch.
And this is election it simply too important for people to be that ignorant or that selfish.
The First Lady, is coming out strong on behalf of Hillary, kind of puts things into perspective:
First Lady Michelle Obama tore into Donald Trump Wednesday, telling Hillary Clinton supporters, "We need an adult in the White House."
"When making life-or-death, war-or-peace decisions, a president can't just pop off or lash out irrationally," she said on behalf of the Democratic presidential nominee at La Salle University in Philadelphia. "We need an adult in the White House. I guarantee you."
Obama criticized Trump over his spreading of the birther conspiracy theory, continuing a rebuke she first made earlier this month while stumping for Clinton in Virginia.
"There are those who questioned and continue to question for the past eight years whether my husband was even born in this country," Obama said to boos. "And let me say: hurtful, deceitful questions deliberately designed to undermine his presidency. Questions that cannot be blamed on others or swept under the rug by an insincere sentence uttered at a press conference."
"So if a candidate is erratic and threatening, if a candidate traffics in prejudice, fear and lies on the campaign trail, if a candidate thinks that not paying taxes makes you smart or that it's good business when people lose their homes, if a candidate regularly and flippantly makes cruel and insulting comments about women -- about how we look, how we act -- well, sadly, that's who that candidate really is," she said.
Yeah this is not an election featuring two capable politicians with partisan disagreements, this is essentially a contest between an adult more than qualified for the job, and an infant spreading feces all over the walls whenever he does not get his way.
And if after seeing that debate on Monday people are still having trouble deciding who should be in the White House I really think they are due for a mental health check.
Simply put it is time for everybody to put on their big boy (or girl) pants and do the right thing for the future of this country.
Friday, July 29, 2016
Donald Trump essentially says that a vote for the Jill Stein of the Green Party is a lost vote for Hillary.
![]() |
| Go ahead, throw your vote away. |
Donald Trump on Wednesday said he would be happy if people voted for Green Party candidate Jill Stein for president because it would draw votes away from Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
During a rally in Toledo, Ohio, Trump appeared to dismiss candidates outside of the two major parties.
“I think a vote for Stein would be good — that’s the Green Party,” he said. “Because I figure anyone voting for Stein is gonna be for Hillary. So I think vote for Stein is fine.”
Gee if even Donald Trump understands that a vote for a third party candidate like Jill Stein only helps him in the long run you would think all of these idiots who are so angry that Hillary Clinton won the nomination that they cannot bring themselves to vote for the Democrat might figure that out as well.
I mean the guy is a fucking idiot, and he gets it.
Labels:
2016,
Democrats,
Donald Trump,
Green Party,
morons,
Presidency,
third party candidate
Monday, May 30, 2016
Well this is fairly interesting coming from Bill Kristol.
The first thing that needs to be said is that you must take EVERYTHING that Bill Kristol says with a giant grain of salt. The guy is wrong so much that he should get a parade for every time he gets something right.Just a heads up over this holiday weekend: There will be an independent candidate--an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance.— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) May 29, 2016
Having said that perhaps this is one of those times he gets a parade.
Unless of course his "impressive candidate, with a strong team, and a real chance" turns out to be the Libertarian party's Gary Johnson. Because he is none of those things.
(Besides it's more or less impossible to take the Libertarians seriously after this.)
Well whoever it is it seems to have made Trump feel a little threatened.
Bill Kristol has been wrong for 2yrs-an embarrassed loser, but if the GOP can't control their own, then they are not a party. Be tough, R's!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2016
The Republican Party has to be smart & strong if it wants to win in November. Can't allow lightweights to set up a spoiler Indie candidate!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2016
Here's hoping that the Stop Trump movement really has enough oomph to make this happen, cause it would be awesome.If dummy Bill Kristol actually does get a spoiler to run as an Independent, say good bye to the Supreme Court!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2016
Labels:
2016,
Bill Kristol,
politics,
Presidency,
Republicans,
third party candidate,
Twitter
Friday, May 06, 2016
Conservative politician pushing hard for a third party candidate to run in 2016 presidential race. Great idea!
| "What the hell is happening?" |
Not a fan of Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? You’re not alone.
In a lengthy open letter late Wednesday night, Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., gave voice to the countless Americans who feel frustrated with their likely options for the next commander in chief.
The freshman senator, who made waves last November for criticizing party partisanship in his floor debut, addressed his message posted on Facebook to “those who think both leading presidential candidates are dishonest and have little chance of leading America forward,” or – put more simply – the “majority of America.”
“If you are one of those rare souls who genuinely believe Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are honorable people — if they are the role models you want for your kids — then this letter is not for you,” he wrote. “Instead, this letter is for the majority of Americans who wonder why the nation that put a man on the moon can’t find a healthy leader who can take us forward together.”
Well it is not often that I agree with a staunch conservative, especially one endorsed by both Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin, but I have to say that I am totally on board with this.
By gosh it IS high time for a third party to emerge and challenge the status quo.
I think that if the Sanders and Trump campaigns proved anything it was that people are sick and tired of the same old talking points, coming out of the same old political parties.
What we need is a shot of adrenaline and where better to get that then from the super Right Wing of the Republican party?
I mean sure I guess the disgruntled Bernie Bros could throw something together in between toking up, studying for their midterms, and doing their laundry at their parent's house, but they do not have what the ultra conservatives already have at their disposal.
The Tea Party.
I mean come on that was almost a third party back in 2010 and 2012, so all Sasse and his cronies have to do is refill their oxygen tanks, power up their mobility scooters, and they are all set and ready to roll.....slowly toward Kinkos to start making flyers.
So let me reiterate.
Third party is a good idea, but ONLY if it is a conservative third party.
Because let's face it THAT is what would have the most positive impact on the outcome of the 2016 presidential race.
Seriously, I feel good about this.
Labels:
2016,
Ben Sasse,
conservatives,
Donald Trump,
politics,
Presidency,
Right Wing,
third party candidate
Monday, February 29, 2016
Donald Trump threatening to run as a third party candidate again, because he likes to tease me like that.
| What did you say about me? |
JOHN DICKERSON:Mr. Trump, I want to start with a tweet from you this morning in which you write -- quote -- "The Republican establishment has been pushing for lightweight Senator Marco Rubio to say anything to hit Trump. I signed the pledge. Careful." What does that mean?
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, they're not treating me well. I signed the pledge. I have been very good. I have been very straight and honest and honorable. And they're not treating me well. They -- you look at the way they stacked the audiences in the debates, and I have won every debate according to every poll, every single online poll after the debate. But way they stack the audiences, the way they talk, they have this lightweight Senator Marco Rubio saying terrible things, just personal, terrible things. And I don't think it's fair, the way that the establishment is treating Donald Trump. I will be honest with you.
DICKERSON: You...
TRUMP: I signed the pledge. And I will abide by the pledge, unless they default. But, as far as I'm concerned, they have defaulted.
DICKERSON: So, you wouldn't abide by the pledge right here right now? You wouldn't abide by the pledge, because you think they're defaulting?
TRUMP: Well, I think you understand exactly what's going on. You just pick up any paper, and it's always talking about, how are we going to overthrow Donald Trump? I'm representing a tremendous -- I'm representing millions of people that have -- really feel angry and disenfranchised. And these are great people. And they like me and I love them. And I'll tell you what. We're not being treated right. The Republican Party is not treating me right, and they're not treating the people that I represent right.
As promised if Trump actually decides to run as a third party candidate, and I firmly believe that he would do so simply out of spite if he felt the GOP was "not treating him right," then I will take back every bad thing I ever said about him.
Of course it will hardly matter, because at that point there will be plenty of bad things said about him by the Republicans.
But certainly NOT by the Clinton campaign.
Labels:
2016,
CBS,
Donald Trump,
interview,
politics,
Presidency,
third party candidate
Tuesday, February 16, 2016
Donald Trump goes off on RNC, and hints at possible run as third party candidate.
Courtesy of ABC News:
At a town hall today in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, Donald Trump floated the idea -- without explicitly threatening to do so -- that he may run as an independent candidate.
Trump attacked the Republican National Committee, saying it "better get its act together" and it "does a terrible job."
Trump said he believes the RNC treated him unfairly. Trump also went off on the crowd that booed him during Saturday night's GOP debate in South Carolina: "Look at it, that was a wealthy room."
"The whole room was made of special interests and donors, which is a disgrace from the RNC," Trump said. "The RNC better get its act together because, you know, I signed a pledge. The pledge isn’t being honored by the RNC."
Trump signed an RNC pledge in September, agreeing not to run a third-party candidacy and to support the eventual Republican nominee.
"I signed a pledge, but it’s a double-edged pledge. As far as I’m concerned, they’re in default on their pledge," Trump said of the RNC.
Let me just say right now that if Donald Trump decides to run as a third party candidate in 2016, I will take back every nasty thing I ever said about him.
It would quite literally be about the greatest thing ever for this election, and could possibly damage the GOP so badly that it would never recover.
I can almost hear the RNC filling their Depends at the very thought.
At a town hall today in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, Donald Trump floated the idea -- without explicitly threatening to do so -- that he may run as an independent candidate.
Trump attacked the Republican National Committee, saying it "better get its act together" and it "does a terrible job."
Trump said he believes the RNC treated him unfairly. Trump also went off on the crowd that booed him during Saturday night's GOP debate in South Carolina: "Look at it, that was a wealthy room."
"The whole room was made of special interests and donors, which is a disgrace from the RNC," Trump said. "The RNC better get its act together because, you know, I signed a pledge. The pledge isn’t being honored by the RNC."
Trump signed an RNC pledge in September, agreeing not to run a third-party candidacy and to support the eventual Republican nominee.
"I signed a pledge, but it’s a double-edged pledge. As far as I’m concerned, they’re in default on their pledge," Trump said of the RNC.
Let me just say right now that if Donald Trump decides to run as a third party candidate in 2016, I will take back every nasty thing I ever said about him.
It would quite literally be about the greatest thing ever for this election, and could possibly damage the GOP so badly that it would never recover.
I can almost hear the RNC filling their Depends at the very thought.
Labels:
2016,
Donald Trump,
election,
Presidency,
Republicans,
third party candidate,
YouTube
Tuesday, August 05, 2014
Former California State assemblyman wants to launch a conservative third party and draft Sarah Palin to be its face. Oh can we please make this happen?
Courtesy of TPM:
Steve Baldwin, a conservative activist and former California State assemblyman, on Tuesday penned a detailed proposal for a third, ultra-conservative party.
He said the establishment GOP just isn't cutting it.
"We don’t want the GOP to pursue a 'socialism-lite' agenda. We want them to go on the warpath and do whatever it takes to stop the destruction of our constitutional Republic," Baldwin wrote in Barbwire, a conservative Christian site run by Liberty Counsel Action's VP Matt Barber. "It has become increasingly clear that the GOP leadership will do everything in its power to prevent the party from being influenced in any way by the Tea Party. I have given up on the GOP and am simply not sure it can ever be reformed."
He said that the new Third Party "will do to the GOP what the GOP did to the Whig Party 150 years ago: it will replace the GOP as the main party contesting the Democrat Party."
Baldwin acknowledges that successfully pulling a third party from the GOP is a long shot, but he offers some remedies. One thing the party would need, he argues, is Sarah Palin, who has actually considered a third party herself.
"We would also need a stable of respected national conservative leaders such as Sarah Palin and others to lead the charge on such an effort," he wrote.
Oh please don't tease me former assemblyman Baldwin. It would be too cruel.
Just the idea of a conservative party to drain support from the Republican party is enough to make my nipples erect, but then you add Sarah Palin to the mix and, oh my god, I need a cigarette.
If this were to happen, and I totally support the idea 100%, it would provide so much fodder for late night comics, political pundits, and pajama bottom wearing bloggers, that we would all have oodles of time on our hands to do some realsearching for midget porn research on other topics that we could then bring to our audiences.
It would provide such a potpourri of ridiculous gaffes, and ignorant statements about how government works, that we would probably all type our fingers to the nub in only a matter of days.
Quick somebody tell Sarah Palin that President Obama said she was too much of a coward to do this so that we know she won't be able to resist.
Steve Baldwin, a conservative activist and former California State assemblyman, on Tuesday penned a detailed proposal for a third, ultra-conservative party.
He said the establishment GOP just isn't cutting it.
"We don’t want the GOP to pursue a 'socialism-lite' agenda. We want them to go on the warpath and do whatever it takes to stop the destruction of our constitutional Republic," Baldwin wrote in Barbwire, a conservative Christian site run by Liberty Counsel Action's VP Matt Barber. "It has become increasingly clear that the GOP leadership will do everything in its power to prevent the party from being influenced in any way by the Tea Party. I have given up on the GOP and am simply not sure it can ever be reformed."
He said that the new Third Party "will do to the GOP what the GOP did to the Whig Party 150 years ago: it will replace the GOP as the main party contesting the Democrat Party."
Baldwin acknowledges that successfully pulling a third party from the GOP is a long shot, but he offers some remedies. One thing the party would need, he argues, is Sarah Palin, who has actually considered a third party herself.
"We would also need a stable of respected national conservative leaders such as Sarah Palin and others to lead the charge on such an effort," he wrote.
Oh please don't tease me former assemblyman Baldwin. It would be too cruel.
Just the idea of a conservative party to drain support from the Republican party is enough to make my nipples erect, but then you add Sarah Palin to the mix and, oh my god, I need a cigarette.
If this were to happen, and I totally support the idea 100%, it would provide so much fodder for late night comics, political pundits, and pajama bottom wearing bloggers, that we would all have oodles of time on our hands to do some real
It would provide such a potpourri of ridiculous gaffes, and ignorant statements about how government works, that we would probably all type our fingers to the nub in only a matter of days.
Quick somebody tell Sarah Palin that President Obama said she was too much of a coward to do this so that we know she won't be able to resist.
Labels:
2014,
2016,
California,
conservatives,
politics,
Republicans,
Sarah Palin,
stupid,
third party candidate
Monday, April 14, 2014
James Carville: "If it loses the 2016 presidential election, the Republican Party as we know it today will be extinct."
Courtesy of the YouTube page:
"Fast forward to January 2016," Carville said. "The most likely, though not the only scenario is Hillary Clinton is the presumptive nominee. Everybody's going to have a poll in the field showing how they fare against Hillary. They're not going to not nominate somebody because of Common Core [i.e., Jeb Bush]."
"Trust me," Carville warned. "The party knows, and I use this word advisedly, that if it loses the 2016 presidential election, the Republican Party as we know it today will be extinct."
"We heard that in 2008, too," Laura Ingraham said.
"This will be the sixth out of seven elections in which they've lost the popular vote," Carville replied. "The Republicans want to win this. That will be the biggest issue in January 2016: how can we beat Hillary Clinton?"
I am going to go on record and agree with this assessment.
I think the Republican party will still be able to win local elections, especially in red states, but even that could start to fall off if their national image is one of the always second place opposition party only.
I also think that if they lose in 2016 there will be a legitimate opening for a third party.
Not a Tea Party either, they are too enmeshed with the GOP, I think if a true competitive third party emerges it will have to place itself somewhere within the ideological chasm which separates the Democrats and the Republicans.
That's my opinion, anybody have a different one?
"Fast forward to January 2016," Carville said. "The most likely, though not the only scenario is Hillary Clinton is the presumptive nominee. Everybody's going to have a poll in the field showing how they fare against Hillary. They're not going to not nominate somebody because of Common Core [i.e., Jeb Bush]."
"Trust me," Carville warned. "The party knows, and I use this word advisedly, that if it loses the 2016 presidential election, the Republican Party as we know it today will be extinct."
"We heard that in 2008, too," Laura Ingraham said.
"This will be the sixth out of seven elections in which they've lost the popular vote," Carville replied. "The Republicans want to win this. That will be the biggest issue in January 2016: how can we beat Hillary Clinton?"
I am going to go on record and agree with this assessment.
I think the Republican party will still be able to win local elections, especially in red states, but even that could start to fall off if their national image is one of the always second place opposition party only.
I also think that if they lose in 2016 there will be a legitimate opening for a third party.
Not a Tea Party either, they are too enmeshed with the GOP, I think if a true competitive third party emerges it will have to place itself somewhere within the ideological chasm which separates the Democrats and the Republicans.
That's my opinion, anybody have a different one?
Labels:
2016,
ABC,
Democrats,
Hillary Clinton,
James Carville,
politics,
Republicans,
Sunday,
talk show,
Tea Party,
third party candidate,
YouTube
Tuesday, July 02, 2013
"Look you can ridicule Sarah Palin all you want, but don't you dare photoshop her!" Signed, The Palin-bots.
| Loves freedom, riding scooters, and Sarah Palin. |
In 2008, to me, Sarah Palin was the “hope” and “change” the GOP could have used. Palin seemed to be more the ‘maverick’ than McCain ever was or could hope to be.
However, shortly after her convention speech, the McCain campaign took over, the Left attacked, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Now, after four years of being the quasi-professional bomb-throwing GOP outsider, Palin is tossing the idea out there that she’s open to supporting a third party.
While the idea is somewhat appealing to those who would rather flee than fight to save America, it is, ultimately, a fool-hearty idea.
In fact, starting a third party, would result in about as much success as Ralph Nader’s (or Ross Perot’s, for that matter) bid for the White House.
Now not only does the author essentially call Palin a "bomb thrower" and coward a who was prepared to flee rather than fight, but he also went on to categorize Palin's suggestions with those espoused by Unions and Socialists.
I know right?
So as you can imagine this made the Palin-bots take up their pitchforks and torches and prepare to drive the "Redstaters" away from their princess. But not so much for the reasons mentioned above.
You see they did a far worse thing than drag Klondike Kardashian's name through the mud, they dared to photoshop her picture.
The horror!
Now all of us here already know that picture is fake because it shows cleavage, and Palin only has fake breatesesses attached to a Victoria's Secret bra, and cannot show actual cleavage.
See?
But the "vibrantly living" folks over at the Sea O'Pee were indignant!
Considering the attire and position of the person who owns the body that they Photoshopped Governor Palin’s head on to, it’s obvious that this was posted to demean her.
The bastards!
They were SO insulted and riled up that they demanded that Redstate editor Erik Erickson admit what he had done. And take it down.
He seemed unimpressed.
Oh now he done did it!
In response to Erickson's refusal to admit that it was photoshopped, and his dismissal of their anger, they started digging up pictures to prove their point and even brought in their blogger attack dogs to say mean things about his sexuality.
Hmm, now who does that sound like?
All in all it made for one of the fumiest incidents of tantrum throwing and hair pulling that I have ever seen.
Ahh, good times.
Personally I think that Redstate was just too lazy to look for a good picture of Palin with Santa for their article.
Here's one.
Hell there's even one of her with Rudolph. Can't say THAT'S photoshopped.
And as for cleavage pictures, well where do we start?
If you get my drift.
Labels:
C4P,
indignant,
photoshop,
politics,
Redstate,
ridicule,
Sarah Palin,
third party candidate,
Twitter
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Poorly lit, and badly wigged, Sarah Palin finally gets her interview on Fox News. At least we THINK that's Sarah Palin.
Apparently Palin is so embarrassing to Fox News that they don't want anybody to be able to see that they are still giving her air time.
I think she was bitching about the immigration bill but to be honest it was hard to tell because I kept getting blinded by the shine off her lip gloss ,and was trying to figure out why she was panting so hard. (Makes me wonder if those fake boobies are heavy?)
Here's what I did pick up, in between the huge intakes of breath and chunks of word salad.
She WOULD be willing to start a third party if the Republicans start being reasonable and doing their jobs, and she DOESN'T know what in the hell she is talking about.
Oh, and EVERYTHING is Obama's fault.
You know after watching this I really think that Willow should have taken the job she was offered by Melissa Rivers during "Celebrity Wife Swap." After all doing human hair would be a breeze compared to being tasked to tranquilize and staple that monstrosity onto Palin's head for THIS video. (I swear I saw it lick its lips at one point.)
I think she was bitching about the immigration bill but to be honest it was hard to tell because I kept getting blinded by the shine off her lip gloss ,and was trying to figure out why she was panting so hard. (Makes me wonder if those fake boobies are heavy?)
Here's what I did pick up, in between the huge intakes of breath and chunks of word salad.
She WOULD be willing to start a third party if the Republicans start being reasonable and doing their jobs, and she DOESN'T know what in the hell she is talking about.
Oh, and EVERYTHING is Obama's fault.
You know after watching this I really think that Willow should have taken the job she was offered by Melissa Rivers during "Celebrity Wife Swap." After all doing human hair would be a breeze compared to being tasked to tranquilize and staple that monstrosity onto Palin's head for THIS video. (I swear I saw it lick its lips at one point.)
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Sarah Palin endorses idea of third party (Won't let me speak at your convention? This'll learn ya!) and laughs off idea of running for Governor of Alaska in the future. (She is not the ONLY one laughing at that idea by the way.)
![]() |
| Click anywhere on road kill wig to start video |
The first one is stupid, so let's skip it, but the second one, from "Facebook follower Mona," asks:
"Would you Consider at any point a viable conservative third party if neither party will move from their current positions?"
What? Somebody is asking the defeated VP candidate from the last presidential election if she thinks it is time for a third party? Well what kind of Republican would she be if she supported an idea like that? Of course she wou....I'm sorry she said what?
"That's a great question. (Uh oh.) You know in studying history (Something I have never done) look what happened in those mid 1800's when the Whig party went away and the Republican party then surfaced because people, uh the electorate got sick and tired of both parties uh fighting for power and weren't doing the will of the people. That's why the Republican party rose up, so yeah if history is any indication it's certainly a possibility at some point if Republicans don't remember what the planks in their platform represent. (They represent giving me the speaking slot I demanded at the convention assholes!) And the planks in the platform are all about equality, their about equal opportunity to prosper and thrive in the most exceptional nation in the world. And how do we do that? Through free market. If Republicans stray too far that, and start becoming more LIKE the liberal Left, the Democrats. Then wouldn't be surprised if history would repeat itself."
Okay I think we can safely assume that Palin has NO idea which planks make up the 2012 Republican platform. The ones they have currently are all about restricting a woman's right to choose, cracking down on illegal immigration, and repealing the hell out of Obamacare.
Palin sounds like she is reading off of the list of Democratic party planks to me. Which is bizarre since she seems to be chastising the REPUBLICANS for leaning too far to the Left.
Gee it almost makes her sound insane. But nah!
Next "totally spontaneous question from Fox News viewer" is:
"This is my ? Sarah would you run for Governor of Alaska again?"
BIG shit eating grin on Sarah's face "You know I would MUCH rather (Shove hot needles in my eyes!) work on unlocking Alaska's vast resources. The largest state in the Union, so rich in oil, and gas, and coal, and zinc, and iron, and uh copper, and gold, (Is anybody else getting horny?) and the world's richest wild seafood fisheries in uh uh on our planet, I'd rather work on unlocking our resources to help secure our nation for our solvency, for our sovereignty as a union than being...holed up in Juneau again."
Okay, uh let me start by saying What...The ...Fuck?
Number one how can a woman who demanded a per diem to live in her house in Wasilla claim to have been "holed up in Juneau?" And second, exactly how do her Fox News rants, Tea Party speaking gigs, and appearances on reality shows help to "unlock" Alaska's natural resources?
I mean she doesn't think that SHE is one of those resources does she?
We already have a black, toxic, environmentally poisonous substance oozing out of our ground here in Alaska. We certainly don't need HER as well!
Personally I think that this little mean girl tantrum was directed at the GOP for daring to keep her away from their convention. For doing so she is essentially threatening them with the idea of starting a third party to challenge them.
After all she did have just under 1,600 people sign a petition attempting to force the GOP to give her a speaking slot, so you can just imagine that they are shaking in their snakeskin boots and tailored suits at the very thought.
You know it is a little hard to make out over the sound of the oncoming hurricane, but is that laughter emanating from Tampa Florida that I hear?
Labels:
2012,
FOX News,
interview,
politics,
Republicans,
Sarah Palin,
third party candidate
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Is Lisa Murkowski considering a run for the Senate as a third party candidate?
From the Daily Beast:
The ongoing battle for who won the Republican primary in the Alaska Senate race will come down to the absentee ballots, but in an exclusive interview with The Daily Beast, a source within the Murkowski campaign says they know of one possible legal option to pursue a third-party run. If Murkowski is not victorious when the absentee ballots are counted and decides to wage an Independent party bid, they might consider using this option, which the source wouldn't describe, but did confirm they were seriously looking at.
"We are going to take a look at them and see whether the option is there or not, but it's a decision she (Murkowski) has to make," the Murkowski camp source said. "There is an option I know of."
In a general election, Murkowski would be hard to beat. The camp said it would also be a message to their supporters who didn't bother going to the polls Tuesday.
"If she were to make that decision she would definitely be a strong candidate. She has a substantial amount of money left, and one would have to wonder whether or not last night's results are a wake-up call to less-motivated, moderate, middle-of-the-road voters who went home after work yesterday in the sunshine and thought it's not a big deal, she would win."
If Murkowski were to choose to run as an independent, probably as an AIP candidate like Wally Hickel, she would pretty much guarantee that Joe Miller would not win the election, and if Democrats turned out in large enough numbers it is somewhat doubtful she could beat Scott McAdams. Of course considering my recent track record I would certainly not want to make any definitive predictions as to what the outcome of a three way race might be.
I met Scott McAdams just about two hours ago, and listened to his first press conference as a Democratic Senate candidate. I found him to be intelligent, quick witted, and pretty well informed on the issues. I still have some reservations, but he is certainly not an Alvin Greene type. He is the real deal and he has a very real resume of accomplishments and experience to run on.
By the way the rumor that the Democratic party is going to ask Scott McAdams to step aside and let ex-Governor Tony Knowles take his place, is just that, a rumor. From what I learned today Tony is not interested and the rumor was started by somebody OUTSIDE of Alaska. And by the way that was, sadly, the very first question posed to Mayor McAdams during his first ever press conference as a senatorial candidate. Not exactly a positive first note to start off what will likely be a very contentious campaign now is it?
P.S. by the way despite how the national media might frame this upset, literally every single person I have talked to here in Alaska have said they don't believe that Sarah Palin had ANYTHING to do with Miller's victory. The lion's share of the credit seems to be going to the large Evangelical turnout in response to Ballot Measure 2.
The ongoing battle for who won the Republican primary in the Alaska Senate race will come down to the absentee ballots, but in an exclusive interview with The Daily Beast, a source within the Murkowski campaign says they know of one possible legal option to pursue a third-party run. If Murkowski is not victorious when the absentee ballots are counted and decides to wage an Independent party bid, they might consider using this option, which the source wouldn't describe, but did confirm they were seriously looking at.
"We are going to take a look at them and see whether the option is there or not, but it's a decision she (Murkowski) has to make," the Murkowski camp source said. "There is an option I know of."
In a general election, Murkowski would be hard to beat. The camp said it would also be a message to their supporters who didn't bother going to the polls Tuesday.
"If she were to make that decision she would definitely be a strong candidate. She has a substantial amount of money left, and one would have to wonder whether or not last night's results are a wake-up call to less-motivated, moderate, middle-of-the-road voters who went home after work yesterday in the sunshine and thought it's not a big deal, she would win."
If Murkowski were to choose to run as an independent, probably as an AIP candidate like Wally Hickel, she would pretty much guarantee that Joe Miller would not win the election, and if Democrats turned out in large enough numbers it is somewhat doubtful she could beat Scott McAdams. Of course considering my recent track record I would certainly not want to make any definitive predictions as to what the outcome of a three way race might be.
I met Scott McAdams just about two hours ago, and listened to his first press conference as a Democratic Senate candidate. I found him to be intelligent, quick witted, and pretty well informed on the issues. I still have some reservations, but he is certainly not an Alvin Greene type. He is the real deal and he has a very real resume of accomplishments and experience to run on.
By the way the rumor that the Democratic party is going to ask Scott McAdams to step aside and let ex-Governor Tony Knowles take his place, is just that, a rumor. From what I learned today Tony is not interested and the rumor was started by somebody OUTSIDE of Alaska. And by the way that was, sadly, the very first question posed to Mayor McAdams during his first ever press conference as a senatorial candidate. Not exactly a positive first note to start off what will likely be a very contentious campaign now is it?
P.S. by the way despite how the national media might frame this upset, literally every single person I have talked to here in Alaska have said they don't believe that Sarah Palin had ANYTHING to do with Miller's victory. The lion's share of the credit seems to be going to the large Evangelical turnout in response to Ballot Measure 2.
Labels:
Alaska,
election,
Joe Miller,
Lisa Murkowski,
Scott McAdams,
Senate,
third party candidate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




