No debate discussion?

[*bfine32*]

(01-16-2016, 04:21 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: How's that working out for him?  His chance of winning with the networks: slim to none.  His chance of winning without the networks:  none.  He hasn't taken away any power from anyone.

BTW, Welcome back; haven't seen you around much.

Seldom agree with you, but enjoy your comments. 

[fredtoast]

Rand Paul is not a victim of the GOP. Rand Paul is not a victim of the networks. Rand Paul is not a victim of the DNC "not letting anyone challenge Hillary" (seriously?)

Rand Paul just is not that popular with voters.

[*bfine32*]

(01-16-2016, 12:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Rand Paul is not a victim of the GOP.  Rand Paul is not a victim of the networks.  Rand Paul is not a victim of the DNC "not letting anyone challenge Hillary" (seriously?)

Rand Paul just is not that popular with voters.

I know I've never said Rand Paul is a victim of the DNC not letting anyone challenge Hillary.

I have said Paul's best chance of getting nominated would be to switch parties. Hell he would automatically be top 4 and most likely pass O'Mallay in about 2 days. 

The question would be if he did jump would the DNC consider him a viable candidate and support him. 

[fredtoast]

(01-16-2016, 01:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I know I've never said Rand Paul is a victim of the DNC not letting anyone challenge Hillary.

I have said Paul's best chance of getting nominated would be to switch parties. Hell he would automatically be top 4 and most likely pass O'Mallay in about 2 days. 

The question would be if he did jump would the DNC consider him a viable candidate and support him. 

The two party system is crushing our country.  I don't support Paul, but I do agree with his position regarding out overseas military actions.  If the system was working properly there would be more than just two choices and when something needed to get done congressmen would have to form coalitions that shifted based on the individual issues.

The ideal situation would be 3 or 4 major parties with no one party holding a majority.  That way it would be possible to support cutting our military and still be in favor of strong government regulation in other areas.

[StLucieBengal]

Conservatives and socialists need to split off and leave the progressives to be their own party.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-16-2016, 08:31 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: In truth, the people, through the pollsters, are the gate keepers. He isn't polling high enough, so the networks aren't going to bother with him.

Which is fine. I'm not here saying he should be in anythng. Just saying that having debates off the networks and streamed Is the way to go in the future.

I think this allows for a more open and transparent situation. Then we get live reaction direct from people instead of it filtered by focus groups or the pollsters.

[fredtoast]

(01-16-2016, 01:15 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Conservatives and socialists need to split off and leave the progressives to be their own party.

Doesn't work like that.

In some situations government assitence is a good thing.  In other situations too much government intervention is a bad thing.  To look at every issue with a black-and-white theory that "all government bad" or "all government good" is childishly naive.  It would be like choosing a car based on its color instead of the more important characteristics.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-16-2016, 01:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Doesn't work like that.

In some situations government assitence is a good thing.  In other situations too much government intervention is a bad thing.  To look at every issue with a black-and-white theory that "all government bad" or "all government good" is childishly naive.  It would be like choosing acar based on its color instead of the more important characteristics.

If you want a multi party situation that will be what happens. It's already happening in the GOP. And the sanders vs Clinton separation of the Dems is happening as well. Hillary is lucky Elizabeth warren didn't run. She could probably seperate and have a strong coalition.