It's a joke. I know what a Fokker biplane is, hero. You're not as clever as you think you are.
BRK: Mitt Romney to speak on "the state of the 2016 Presidential race" tomorrow at University of Utah.
What do you think it is? Could he run independent?
The GOP is desperate to give hillary the election, it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to organize a 3rd party run so they could get their wish.
Out of curiosity, do you mean "desperate to give" as in "foolishly flopping around desperately in a way that will give" or "intentionally going to give."
I don't see any scenario where the GOP wants HRC to win the general election.
Debating a 3rd party run is a scenario they know they have no hope of winning and know full well is going to give the election to HRC. I'm not quite sure how you could spin it another way without being blissfully ignorant.
Here's hoping:
This man, Barkhad Abdi, is actually from Minneapolis (after Somalia). Might explain why Rubio did so well there.....
BRK: Mitt Romney to speak on "the state of the 2016 Presidential race" tomorrow at University of Utah.
What do you think it is? Could he run independent?
Out of curiosity, do you mean "desperate to give" as in "foolishly flopping around desperately in a way that will give" or "intentionally going to give."
I don't see any scenario where the GOP wants HRC to win the general election.
To the contrary, I fully believe that the Establishment would rather throw the election to Hillary, than to see Trump win.
There are not two parties in Washington. There is only the UniParty. Trump is a threat to the oligarchy.
I think this is a misunderstanding. While the party platforms may be easily confused with each other, there are establishment lines between Rs and Ds. Favored institutions, law firms, accountants, PR groups, think tanks, vendors, etc. Rs have theirs, Ds have their own.
If a D wins, R-establishment gains nothing. If Trump wins, R-establishment still has an opportunity to influence. If a non-Trump R wins, then they win.
Intentionally helping HRC win would trade the opportunity to influence for a complete lack of influence. That doesn't make sense.
I think this is a misunderstanding. While the party platforms may be easily confused with each other, there are establishment lines between Rs and Ds. Favored institutions, law firms, accountants, PR groups, think tanks, vendors, etc. Rs have theirs, Ds have their own.
If a D wins, R-establishment gains nothing. If Trump wins, R-establishment still has an opportunity to influence. If a non-Trump R wins, then they win.
Intentionally helping HRC win would trade the opportunity to influence for a complete lack of influence. That doesn't make sense.
And yet, the Establishment is just starting to make that sort of noise: elected Republicans declaring that they'll never vote for Trump, McConnell telling senators that they can run against Trump in their campaigns, and some even floating the idea of an independent run.
Sit down and shut up, Mitt. You had your chance. You blew it, and are now irrelevant.
To the contrary, I fully believe that the Establishment would rather throw the election to Hillary, than to see Trump win.
There are not two parties in Washington. There is only the UniParty. Trump is a threat to the oligarchy.
CARSON will tell supporters today that he does not see “path forward,” will not attend Thursday debate
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...bef352-d9b3-11e5-891a-4ed04f4213e8_story.html
Totally agree, there.You're acting like they're thinking rationally.
This is historically inaccurate. Much effort has been made, with mixed results.Is that why they have made no effort to stop obama on practically anything?