https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du3WhHrrNgs

Who wants to see Donald Trump vs Vladimir Putin? To me that's worth 4 years of presidency. I mean, if Bernie Sanders gets bullied on Twitter, (#BlackLivesMatter drama) I don't want him to be the guy dealing with Putin

Posted by d_rock97 on 11/3/2015 10:30:00 PM (view original):
Who wants to see Donald Trump vs Vladimir Putin? To me that's worth 4 years of presidency. I mean, if Bernie Sanders gets bullied on Twitter, (#BlackLivesMatter drama) I don't want him to be the guy dealing with Putin

TIL that being willing to engage in actual discussion in response to actual policy issues that a large group of citizens has constitutes "getting bullied".

...actually, this attitude explains the entire Republican debate strategy, and right-wing policy and tactics in general over the past 10+ years.

Fact is that the Republican presidential candidates have proven that they can't even handle basic questions from moderators. And you think they'll handle Putin better than Bernie Sanders? (To Trump's credit, he didn't sign onto this ludicrous complaint, but he's had his own issues with the debates, such as going after Megyn Kelly apparently because she's female on the first Fox debate.)

I think their complaint is that they aren't getting the same type of questions asked that the Dems are getting. Are you a comic book candidate? Did HRC get asked that? Why didn't CNBC, a money based channel, ask more questions on the economy and other questions regarding jobs, Healthcare...

I would rather have a question asked that gives opportunity for a candidate to provide the audience an honest opinion on the subject. Having a moderator try to upstage a candidate may be good theater, but I think most of the audience would prefer to be informed on the topic.

I don't think it should be easy for them at the podium. How they respond to pressure, the ability to think on their feet, I want to see. But the line of questioning should be similar for both parties.

Ask tough questions. Ask Hillary why she is on an economic platform 180 degrees different from her husband's, which is said to have been successful. Just don't allow the moderator to answer the question...Crowley did that 4 years ago.

Ask Rubio about his finances. Ask Bernie why a child sex advocate(Judith Levine) is allowed to publish on Bernie's website...

Even in this day and age i think people would like to see for themselves. Patton Oswalt watched the recent debate. His comment was that he hates Ted Cruz but agreed with everything he said.

Australian gun control. In 1996 they confiscated 650k weapons. Was 1/5 to 1/3 of the citizens weaponry. They do not have a Bill of Rights that includes a right to bear arms.

In US there are as many weapons as citizens. Over 300 million. Rumor has it that some Americans cling to their guns and religion. If a nice young man knocked on the door, said he was with the government, is here to confiscate the weapons, would those same citizens suddenly cease to clinging to said guns? Countless government agents, as well as scores of law abiding citizens would die.

It is a fool's errand to consider gun confiscation in this country. Estimates say 30-50 percent of this country's residences contain a gun. 9/11 would look like a picnic compared to the first day of an attempt to confiscate. You would be sending my son, your nephew, grandson, neighbor , out to die for a political agenda that would change nothing regarding mass shootings. Make a valid point or shut the hell up.

Posted by d_rock97 on 11/3/2015 10:30:00 PM (view original):
Who wants to see Donald Trump vs Vladimir Putin? To me that's worth 4 years of presidency. I mean, if Bernie Sanders gets bullied on Twitter, (#BlackLivesMatter drama) I don't want him to be the guy dealing with Putin

Agreed.  Trump may not have fought in Vietnam, but he's fought in wars, real wars.  How many Twitter beefs has he had with Rosie O'Donnell?  Can't say he's won them all, but he's still standing, right?  If he can go toe-to-toe with Rosie, Putin will be easy.

Posted by DoctorKz on 11/4/2015 12:46:00 AM (view original):
Australian gun control. In 1996 they confiscated 650k weapons. Was 1/5 to 1/3 of the citizens weaponry. They do not have a Bill of Rights that includes a right to bear arms.

In US there are as many weapons as citizens. Over 300 million. Rumor has it that some Americans cling to their guns and religion. If a nice young man knocked on the door, said he was with the government, is here to confiscate the weapons, would those same citizens suddenly cease to clinging to said guns? Countless government agents, as well as scores of law abiding citizens would die.

It is a fool's errand to consider gun confiscation in this country. Estimates say 30-50 percent of this country's residences contain a gun. 9/11 would look like a picnic compared to the first day of an attempt to confiscate. You would be sending my son, your nephew, grandson, neighbor , out to die for a political agenda that would change nothing regarding mass shootings. Make a valid point or shut the hell up.

I'm confused.  Wasn't Obama supposed to be the one who took away everyone's guns?  I don't think he's come close, has he?  Or is this something that will happen once the Demoncraps institute Sharia Law?  I'm Canadian with no access to Fox News, so this stuff is sort of hard to follow up here.

CS, study Fabianist socialism and the gradualist process of dialectic materialism. One does what one can get away with, while not causing a major backlash against "the arc of progress." And by "one," one means the collective.

"Our individual salvation depends on our collective salvation."

The Hippies want to turn this country into a commune, courtesy of their rich uncle's bank account.... Sounds like Archie's ******** to the Meathead..

Posted by dino27 on 11/3/2015 10:50:00 PM (view original):
putin will toast trump by saying name your poison..for some reason trump has been reminding me of Charlie sheen...esp the winning thing.

Actually my joke in 2012 was that if Trump got the Republican nomination the Democrats should just give up being the Serious party too and nominate Charlie Sheen. So I am not the only one who sees a connection here. 

Sigh, kind of makes you wish for the Eisenhower-Stevenson elections or FDR-Wendell Wilkie. So much for states-person-ship. sigh.

Posted by uncleal on 11/3/2015 10:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by d_rock97 on 11/3/2015 10:30:00 PM (view original):
Who wants to see Donald Trump vs Vladimir Putin? To me that's worth 4 years of presidency. I mean, if Bernie Sanders gets bullied on Twitter, (#BlackLivesMatter drama) I don't want him to be the guy dealing with Putin

TIL that being willing to engage in actual discussion in response to actual policy issues that a large group of citizens has constitutes "getting bullied".

...actually, this attitude explains the entire Republican debate strategy, and right-wing policy and tactics in general over the past 10+ years.

Fact is that the Republican presidential candidates have proven that they can't even handle basic questions from moderators. And you think they'll handle Putin better than Bernie Sanders? (To Trump's credit, he didn't sign onto this ludicrous complaint, but he's had his own issues with the debates, such as going after Megyn Kelly apparently because she's female on the first Fox debate.)

Yeah, if Megyn Kelly and the moderators at CNBC are too difficult for him (and the other GOP candidates) to handle, I don't think we are looking at people ready to deal with Putin and the Chinese. 

Oh, well. I was trying to be a little less overtly political on this site (in part because of the silence of my favorite sparring partners pinotfan and boogerlips), but with an election campaign in full swing and the WIS full of political discourse:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU