Support NeoGAF

[NYCmetsfan]

limits on types of food will only increase their trade for cash. AKA fraud which the GOP hates.

There's not need for limits beyond the obvious, booze and cigarettes.

People want to eat and are better at budgeting than people give them credit for. Seeing one person buy stake without understanding what else they bought, how much they have, their circumstances is only an effort to make the program gruel and water.

 

[perfectchaos007]

My avatar's son is going to announce his candidacy for president tomorrow. He has my vote

 

[JesseEwiak]

I buy a lot more crappy sugary food as an adult with my own money than my Mom ever did with food stamps.

 

[Poodlestrike]

limits on types of food will only increase their trade for cash. AKA fraud which the GOP hates.

There's not need for limits beyond the obvious, booze and cigarettes.

People want to eat and are better at budgeting than people give them credit for. Seeing one person buy stake without understanding what else they bought, how much they have, their circumstances is only an effort to make the program gruel and water.

Well... yeah.

Did you miss the memo?

 

[PhoenixDark]

My avatar's son is going to announce his candidacy for president tomorrow. He has my vote

Once again it looks like I won't be voting in the Michigan democrat primary since it doesn't matter, so I'll be voting for Rand in the republican primary.

Spoiler

I voted for Huckabee in the 2008 primary

 

[gutter_trash]

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...ush-listed-himself-as-hispanic-on-voter-form/

lmao, and here we go

technically, he is a Spanish speaker so he is Hispanic

 

[KingK]

Once again it looks like I won't be voting in the Michigan democrat primary since it doesn't matter, so I'll be voting for Rand in the republican primary.

Spoiler

I voted for Huckabee in the 2008 primary

I'll be doing the same in Indiana unless Hilary ends up getting a real challenger by some miracle. But yeah, if a republican does end up winning somehow, I'd rather it be Rand Paul. At least i agree with him on some things.

 

[perfectchaos007]

I'll be doing the same in Indiana unless Hilary ends up getting a real challenger by some miracle. But yeah, if a republican does end up winning somehow, I'd rather it be Rand Paul. At least i agree with him on some things.

Once again it looks like I won't be voting in the Michigan democrat primary since it doesn't matter, so I'll be voting for Rand in the republican primary.

Spoiler

I voted for Huckabee in the 2008 primary

Rand Paul should use this mindset as inspiration for his campaign slogan. Trash the "I stand with Rand" slogan and go for something that resonates with the voters like:

"Rand Paul: If you're stuck in a red state, he's the least crazy of the GOP candidates you can vote for"

"Rand Paul: Your process of elimination candidate"

"Rand Paul: The GOP is full of nut-jobs, but this one is at least consistent!"

"Rand Paul: Even if you're a Democrat, register as a Republican to vote for Rand in the primaries. He'll be the easiest GOP candidate to defeat in the general election, We Promise!"

 

[thepotatoman]

Rand Paul should use this mindset as inspiration for his campaign slogan. Trash the "I stand with Rand" slogan and go for something that resonates with the voters like:

"Rand Paul: If you're stuck in a red state, he's the least crazy of the GOP candidates you can vote for"

"Rand Paul: Your process of elimination candidate"

"Rand Paul: The GOP is full of nut-jobs, but this one is at least consistent!"

"Rand Paul: Even if you're a Democrat, register as a Republican to vote for Rand in the primaries. He'll be the easiest GOP candidate to defeat in the general election, We Promise!"

But those don't rhyme.

 

[Aaron Strife]

"Rand Paul: Even if you're a Democrat, register as a Republican to vote for Rand in the primaries. He'll be the easiest GOP candidate to defeat in the general election, We Promise!"

The general election slogan will be

"Rand Paul: Even if you're a Democrat, vote for Rand in the general election. He'll take the fall for the massive economic depression we're bound to hit over the next four years, and dissatisfaction with the Republican party will allow Bernie Sanders to be a viable presidential candidate!"

Put that on a bumper sticker

 

[KingK]

The general election slogan will be

"Rand Paul: Even if you're a Democrat, vote for Rand in the general election. He'll take the fall for the massive economic depression we're bound to hit over the next four years, and dissatisfaction with the Republican party will allow Bernie Sanders to be a viable presidential candidate!"

Put that on a bumper sticker

And "at least he's not a war hawk!"

 

[NeoXChaos]

Rand Paul should use this mindset as inspiration for his campaign slogan. Trash the "I stand with Rand" slogan and go for something that resonates with the voters like:

"Rand Paul: If you're stuck in a red state, he's the least crazy of the GOP candidates you can vote for"

"Rand Paul: Your process of elimination candidate"

"Rand Paul: The GOP is full of nut-jobs, but this one is at least consistent!"

"Ted Cruz: Even if you're a Democrat, register as a Republican to vote for Ted in the primaries. He'll be the easiest GOP candidate to defeat in the general election, We Promise!"

FTFY

 

[Chichikov]

But those don't rhyme.

There once was Rand Paul from Nantucket
Who thought that the fed can go suck it
The standard he told
Why of course, must be gold
But he's cool with the ganja, so fuck it

 

[Maledict]

So Chuck Schumer, soon to be head of the senate Democrats, agrees with the proposed Republican legislation giving congress control over the relaxing of sanctions against Iran.

Assuming that now has a veto proof majority, which it seems to have, does that mean in order to relax sanctions against Iran the senate would have to have a majority vote to get rid of them? Because that's never, ever, ever in a million years happening under any circumstances ever.

Why is it the Democrats are willing to do this to themselves? The Republicans voted as a block every time for years to screw Obama, and yet at one of the most significant foreign policy actions in his term they are still behaving as if it's the senate from 15 years ago and the other party will be reasonable in their actions?

 

[ErasureAcer]

So Chuck Schumer, soon to be head of the senate Democrats, agrees with the proposed Republican legislation giving congress control over the relaxing of sanctions against Iran.

Assuming that now has a veto proof majority, which it seems to have, does that mean in order to relax sanctions against Iran the senate would have to have a majority vote to get rid of them? Because that's never, ever, ever in a million years happening under any circumstances ever.

Why is it the Democrats are willing to do this to themselves? The Republicans voted as a block every time for years to screw Obama, and yet at one of the most significant foreign policy actions in his term they are still behaving as if it's the senate from 15 years ago and the other party will be reasonable in their actions?

All the more reason he shouldn't be head of the Senate Democrats. Funny how you don't mention anywhere in your post the fact Schumer is Jewish. That about explains it all.

 

[KingK]

All the more reason he shouldn't be head of the Senate Democrats. Funny how you don't mention anywhere in your post the fact Schumer is Jewish. That about explains it all.

Not all Jewish people are war mongering pieces of shit.

I believe Schumer is one of AIPAC's biggest allies in the Senate though, which explains it.

 

[B-Dubs]

Not all Jewish people are war mongering pieces of shit.

I believe Schumer is one of AIPAC's biggest allies in the Senate though, which explains it.

Unfortunately it's hard to do politics in New York without the Jewish lobby. That said, it could just be lip service, we're stuck in a wait and see situation. Also I doubt anyone else in the Senate would talk differently in that position, Congress as a whole likes to wash Israel's balls when given a chance. If it's not just talk to placate donors then...

Either way I'm writing him a letter, which is about all I can do from my current position.

 

[KingK]

Unfortunately it's hard to do politics in New York without the Jewish lobby. That said, it could just be lip service, we're stuck in a wait and see situation. Also I doubt anyone else in the Senate would talk differently in that position, Congress as a whole likes to wash Israel's balls when given a chance. If it's not just talk to placate donors then...

Either way I'm writing him a letter, which is about all I can do from my current position.

Congress as a whole does relish an opportunity to publicly felate Israel, especially in the Senate, but a majority of democrats are sticking with the president on this right now. I'm sure we could find a new Senate democratic leader who wouldn't betray the president of his own party and torpedo what could be his legacy defining foreign policy achievement (Not to mention likely escalating us to war) just to score points with his favorite lobbying group.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

John McCain will run for re-election. He'll be 80 years old next year.

 

[BertramCooper]

I really hope this ends up jeopardizing Schumer's chances at succeeding Reid.

Dems can do so much better than Schumer.

 

[Coriolanus]

Kinda wanna see Rand get the nomination just for the inevitable "so, the gold standard eh?" question.

 

[HylianTom]

I'm torn on primaries. We have a jungle primary here in Louisiana, which means Dems and Reps can vote in whichever primary they want. Part of me wants to strengthen a loon like Cruz, but Jeb is just so damn beatable, and his nomination would take a few key arguments away from the GOP against Hillary..

 

[Armoured Priest]

There once was Rand Paul from Nantucket
Who thought that the fed can go suck it
The standard he told
Why of course, must be gold
But he's cool with the ganja, so fuck it

Thanks for the morning chuckle.


Also:

I buy a lot more crappy sugary food as an adult with my own money than my Mom ever did with food stamps.

My family wasn't on food stamps, but I surely do buy more goodies for myself then was ever bought for me as a child

 

[hydragonwarrior]

Rick Perry in South Carolina tipping his toe into the presidential pool again.

Oh my God. *popcorn*

Yessss - i want him to take out the boring Ryan-clone.

 

[hydragonwarrior]

All the more reason he shouldn't be head of the Senate Democrats. Funny how you don't mention anywhere in your post the fact Schumer is Jewish. That about explains it all.

Yeah I'm sure anyone saw this part coming. Hopefully there's a way to get someone who exists outside the realm of this conflict to be making decisions about foreign relations.

 

[NeoXChaos]

John McCain will run for re-election. He'll be 80 years old next year.

Chuck Grassely will be 89 when his term ends should he win next year. They want their seats open in midterms. Hopefully by then, the democrats will be better at them.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I'm surprised Durbin never had a shot at becoming minority leader. I had assumed as Obama's mentor he'd at least get a chance.

Shumer is horrible. And it's not like Obama has much clout with less than two years to go. If he oversteps his bounds (ie the US doesn't veto France's Palestinian resolution) the senate will pass Iran sanctions with 67+ votes.

 

[VanMardigan]

There once was Rand Paul from Nantucket
Who thought that the fed can go suck it
The standard he told
Why of course, must be gold
But he's cool with the ganja, so fuck it

I like this, lol.

 

[Rhomega Beta]

I buy a lot more crappy sugary food as an adult with my own money than my Mom ever did with food stamps.

My family wasn't on food stamps, but I surely do buy more goodies for myself then was ever bought for me as a child

That's what happens when you can choose what to buy and no one can say "no". I'm in the same boat.

 

[ivysaur12]

McCain officially running for reelection.

 

[Poodlestrike]

McCain officially running for reelection.

Wait, seriously?

EDIT: Oh, reelection, whoops. Thought he was hopping on the Presidential hobbyhorse again.

 

[Ploribus]

McCain officially running for reelection.

I'm sure there is somewhen, but are there any notable/interesting examples of people dying of old age while running for president? lol

 

[PhoenixDark]

I'm sure there is somewhen, but are there any notable/interesting examples of people dying of old age while running for president? lol

His lived well into her 90s, he'll be fine.

 

[Outdoor Miner]

Rand Paul’s Home State Relies On Government Programs He’s Vowed To Dismantle

Paul has also made clear that he would take down the social safety net as president, even comparing food stamps to slavery. But nearly 900,000 Kentuckians — one in five residents — struggle to get by on the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), even as benefits have shrunk over the past few years. Meanwhile, food banks in Kentucky have picked up the slack; 56 percent of organizations in the state had to serve more people this year than last, as more than 600,000 people visited food banks in 2014, according to the Kentucky Association of Food Banks.

Nevertheless, Paul has dismissed concerns over poverty, asserting that “the rich are getting richer, but the poor are getting richer even faster.”

Dat quote. This fucking guy.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

never forget:

 

[RustyNails]

Fuck Schumer and every other tri state piece of shit Senators including Kirsten Gillibrand and Bob Menendez who showed up at Bibi's speech in Congress. The ridiculousness of them tripping over each other to suck Israel's dick tells you all.

I highly doubt DNC can blackball these senators so Obama just could be out of luck.

 

[Chichikov]

never forget:

I still can't believe that this cunt has got away with, well, everything.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

All the more reason he shouldn't be head of the Senate Democrats. Funny how you don't mention anywhere in your post the fact Schumer is Jewish. That about explains it all.

and his faith, ethnic background necessitates his views? Sanders is, Ron Wyden is, Al Franken is, Brian Schatz is. This post is literally anti-Semitic. It says he shouldn't be Dem leader because he's jewish.

In the house you have a bunch of other jewish reps who are in support of the Iran deal.

never mind if you read the politico article he's not opposing the deal. and Obama is seemingly open to letting senators express their views without it actually stopping the deal

“They pointed to Obama’s comment to The New York Times over the weekend in which he suggested finding a legislative compromise “that allows Congress to express itself but does not encroach on traditional presidential prerogatives.”

Indeed, in interviews after the agreement was announced, few congressional Democrats were eager to see the deal fall apart even as they press for legislation the White House opposes.
“The [Democrats] who do support it, support it on the principle of congressional review,” said one Democratic source closely following the talks.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...white-house-on-iran-116713.html#ixzz3WdsGJfvw

I don't think its necessary but its not the end of the deal, dems aren't going to buck him and provoke war and an increase in the nuclear program.

 

[Poodlestrike]

All the more reason he shouldn't be head of the Senate Democrats. Funny how you don't mention anywhere in your post the fact Schumer is Jewish. That about explains it all.

And here we go.

 

[NeoXChaos]

McCain officially running for reelection.

He and Grassley are never leaving. They will stay until the end. Realistically, these are probably their last terms. 86 and 89 respectively at the end of 2023.

 

[Aaron Strife]

McCain could still lose, his approval ratings suck. With Democrats, Republicans and Independents. PPP found he was the least popular senator in the country. I imagine he lost much of his "maverick" appeal by being a total buttnugget after the 08 election.

 

[HylianTom]

McCain could still lose, his approval ratings suck. With Democrats, Republicans and Independents. PPP found he was the least popular senator in the country. I imagine he lost much of his "maverick" appeal by being a total buttnugget after the 08 election.

Yeah, he probably still has some of that Palin stink on him. It doesn't wash off easily, I'd bet.

 

[KingK]

and his faith, ethnic background necessitates his views? Sanders is, Ron Wyden is, Al Franken is, Brian Schatz is. This post is literally anti-Semitic. It says he shouldn't be Dem leader because he's jewish.

In the house you have a bunch of other jewish reps who are in support of the Iran deal.

never mind if you read the politico article he's not opposing the deal. and Obama is seemingly open to letting senators express their views without it actually stopping the deal



I don't think its necessary but its not the end of the deal, dems aren't going to buck him and provoke war and an increase in the nuclear program.

Unless the politics of this drastically change in Obama's favor over the next couple months (which is certainly a possibility), requiring congress to have final approval of the deal is the same as killing the deal. It's hard for me to believe that the people sponsoring this bill honestly have intentions other than killing any deal reached with Iran.

 

[Abinash117]

If the Iran bill gets over 67 votes the first time, can Obama still veto it, but not the second time it gets over 2/3 votes?

 

[Poodlestrike]

If the Iran bill gets over 67 votes the first time, can Obama still veto it, but not the second time it gets over 2/3 votes?

Okay, so it's like this: no matter how many votes a bill gets the first time around, the President can veto it. The Senate can then vote on a veto override measure, which requires a 2/3rds majority.

Presidents don't generally veto bills that pass with a 2/3 majority in the first place unless they're very, very sure about flipping some senators, since getting overridden makes you look incredibly weak.

 

[Abinash117]

If Obama can't convince a part of Congress the first time around it would probably be best is to find a way to stall and veto the bill. It probably would get harder for Democrats to continue to support the bill afterwards and while the deal is close to completion.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Sally Kohn: Hey, Christian Business Owners: The Government Isn't "Forcing" You to do Anything

You may have heard that the government is forcing businesses not to discriminate. It isn’t. If you chose to run a business, you have to follow the laws. If you don’t, that’s a choice—and you choose to suffer the consequences.

Still, in the wake of the controversy surrounding Indiana’s law, conservatives don’t see it that way. Even potential Republican presidential candidates are getting in on the assertions. Rick Santorum recently said:

If you’re a print shop and you are a gay man, should you be forced to print ‘God Hates Fags’ for the Westboro Baptist Church because they hold those signs up? Should the government—and this is really the case here — should the government force you to do that? This is about the government coming in and saying, “No, we’re going to make you do this.” And this is where I think we just need some space to say let’s have some tolerance, be a two-way street.

There are two problems with Santorum’s reasoning. The first is that a printer doesn’t have to make such signs, under any law, because refusing to do so is not discrimination in any legally prohibited sense. A print shop can also refuse to print a poster that says, for instance, “F*ck Rick Santorum,” either because it disagrees with the language or the sentiment. Both are entirely legally permissible decisions any business can rightfully make.

But let’s say the printer is asked to make a communion sign or a gay wedding sign. In this case—especially in states that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation as well as religion—refusing to print such a sign would indeed be illegal. The government isn’t forcing that business to do anything other than follow the law. Which is what we expect of all businesses, equally.

This issue of government force is a funny one. You could also argue that the government is forcing you to drive below the speed limit or wear a seatbelt in your car. But it’s not. There isn’t a police officer holding a gun to your head literally forcing you to buckle up. In fact, you are 100 percent free to speed and not wear your seatbelt—and simply deal with the consequences if you’re pulled over. Is the threat of the fine for breaking the law amount to “forcing” you to follow the law? No.

And more to the point, the government certainly isn’t forcing you to drive. If you don’t like the speed limit and seatbelt rules, and don’t want to be subject to the consequences of breaking them, then you can not drive. Whether to drive or not is your choice.

 

[RustyNails]

There once was Rand Paul from Nantucket
Who thought that the fed can go suck it
The standard he told
Why of course, must be gold
But he's cool with the ganja, so fuck it

I wish thread titles were long so we can rename poligaf OT to this.

 

[thefro]

If Obama can't convince a part of Congress the first time around it would probably be best is to find a way to stall and veto the bill. It probably would get harder for Democrats to continue to support the bill afterwards and while the deal is close to completion.

Vetoing the bill would buy him a couple weeks.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I wish thread titles were long so we can rename poligaf OT to this.

"There once was Rand Paul from Nantucket" would make a pretty good title as we head into campaign season (*shudder*).