• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Presidential Primaries 2016

Ladewig said:
What exactly does the list represent?

People who have a chance at the nomination?
People who may be number one in the polls before the nomination?
People who may be in one of the top three in the polls before the nomination?
Something else?
Planet X?
Click to expand...

It's a list of those who are running or may run for President in 2016. Chances of success don't matter much at this point.
 
Spindrift said:
It's a list of those who are running or may run for President in 2016. Chances of success don't matter much at this point.
Click to expand...

If it is just a list of self-professed candidates, then I am pretty confident that Christie is going to utter the words "I am running for president in 2016." Whether he gets laughed off the stage or pulls at least 10 percent in polls, I have no idea. Furthermore, I can only speculate as to what his motivation may be: insurmountable optimism, a desire to build a war chest, a publicity stunt to spur book sales. or simply his wanting to swing his ****.
 
hgc said:
I'll make a bargain: The day that the US Attorney for the district of New Jersey announces that his investigations are concluded and no indictments issued, I'll unstrike C. Christie.
Click to expand...

To be blunt, the list is a joke without Christie on there.
 
Brainster said:
To be blunt, the list is a joke without Christie on there.
Click to expand...

That's a bit extreme, but if Trump can be included when there is no real possibilty he will ever actually run for president, I don't see why Christie should be omitted. He hasn't stated he isn't going to run and he's acting like he's going to.
 
Ladewig said:
If it is just a list of self-professed candidates, then I am pretty confident that Christie is going to utter the words "I am running for president in 2016." Whether he gets laughed off the stage or pulls at least 10 percent in polls, I have no idea. Furthermore, I can only speculate as to what his motivation may be: insurmountable optimism, a desire to build a war chest, a publicity stunt to spur book sales. or simply his wanting to swing his ****.
Click to expand...


It's not self-professed candidates. It's what I call "mentionables." Some are actively campaigning already (R. Paul, H. Clinton, C. Christie, etc) and some are nowhere near that and many never will. Mentionalbles become actual candidates and get a "dot" next to their name when they explicitly say "I am running" or form an exploratory committee or something similar. Mentionables get struck when they explicitly say "not running." Then there's the special cases -- those that get struck because I happen to think that they'll never run due to significant events that intervene, such as losing another election in the meanwhile or becoming embroiled in scandal quagmire. These people may not even realize themselves that they won't run, and that's the class that C. Christie falls into. Others who will never run for anything ever (D. Trump, T. Nugent) don't get struck because their jokiness deserves recognition.

To reiterate -- in my opinion C. Christie will not run for president. He may not even serve out his current term as governor. It's funny to see him out there doing his dance while the curtain is already falling. I'll admit, he had a good thing going before his ham-handed political brutality alerted the world that he's a generator of massive corruption, New Jersey style.
 
Not a Christie fan, but I think writing him off at this stage is really premature.
Frankly, with all his baggage,he stands a better chance against Hilary then any of the other GOP big name hopefuls.
And Rand Paul's biggest problem might be daddy. Daddy Ron keeps on making batcrap crazy statements....his strong support of Putin being the latest...and Rand cannot keep on with the "no comment" routine forever, when every other GOP hopeful is keeping careful track of Ron's craziness for future use.
Rands' problem is is trying to do what might be impossible:Win Mainstream/Establishment GOP support while continuing to be Daddy's heir apparent to the Faithful. He trying to square the circle and I don't think he can do it.
 
By the way, it's always possible for a candidate to be unstruck, as I've done with M. Bachmann, and may be doing with S. Walker as his scandal profile sunsets. So don't fret, C. Christie fans -- if he survives his current travails, he'll be back in our good graces.
 
hgc said:
To reiterate -- in my opinion C. Christie will not run for president. He may not even serve out his current term as governor. It's funny to see him out there doing his dance while the curtain is already falling. I'll admit, he had a good thing going before his ham-handed political brutality alerted the world that he's a generator of massive corruption, New Jersey style.
Click to expand...
That's it? Even though he's doing more than most of the people on the list to act like he's running for president, you don't think he will run. As of right now, he IS running as much as anyone else is. That may change in the future, but isn't that the case for the vast majority of the list? In the years you've been doing this list is there anyone else who fit whatever category you think Christie is in?
 
Sheesh, ya gotta give Gov. Blob credit. Even here in JREF politics where we're all of one accord (:rolleyes:) he can create controversy. Give the guy his due credit. :)
 
Spindrift said:
That's it? Even though he's doing more than most of the people on the list to act like he's running for president, you don't think he will run. As of right now, he IS running as much as anyone else is. That may change in the future, but isn't that the case for the vast majority of the list? In the years you've been doing this list is there anyone else who fit whatever category you think Christie is in?
Click to expand...


Yes, I recognize that he's actively (though not formally) seeking the nomination. There is no one else in my memory with this particular set of circumstances. If we include people who have lost an election, note my swift elimination of G. Allen when he lost the 2006 Senate race (famous for the "Macaca" moment) in Virginia to J. Webb and R. Santorum when he lost his Senate reelection in Pennsylvania the same night. But scandal sinking a candidate who persists in his ambitions? That's a first, I think.

Yes, I am presuming much, including that I better understand the governor's future than he himself does. But then he is well known for sniffing his own ass fumes, and I'm not.
 
Last edited:
Spindrift said:
That's it? Even though he's doing more than most of the people on the list to act like he's running for president, you don't think he will run. As of right now, he IS running as much as anyone else is. That may change in the future, but isn't that the case for the vast majority of the list? In the years you've been doing this list is there anyone else who fit whatever category you think Christie is in?
Click to expand...

You gotta give HGC credit, he says that Christie will be put back on the list if he isn't indicted. Generous of him, I think. It's his list, after all. Not some impartial list put together by folks who understand politics.
:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
hgc said:
That's completely out of context, which is people potentially running for President since I started doing this in JREF forums a few election cycles ago.
Click to expand...

47624fa1f9c0d2b78.jpg


BTW: I do agree that Christie will not succeed and his political career may be over soon. However at this point in time, he is running for president.
 
hgc said:
Way back in May 2013, when M. Bachmann announced her retirement from Congress, I went ahead and struck her from our contenders list. I just figured that Minnesota's Palin was pulling herself out of elective politics.

Did I figure wrong. It seems that our hero is whining to Real Clear Politics that the political press is ignoring the possibility that she will again reach for the brass ring.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...she_might_seek_presidency_in_2016_123419.html

So, welcome back to our old friend. I'm still pretty sure she won't run, but as long as she marks herself among the mentionables, I'll un-strike her.
Click to expand...

How low can she go:
Michele Bachmann: Gays Want To Let Adults 'Freely Prey On Little Children Sexually'
 
hgc said:
It's not self-professed candidates. It's what I call "mentionables." Some are actively campaigning already (R. Paul, H. Clinton, C. Christie, etc) and some are nowhere near that and many never will. Mentionalbles become actual candidates and get a "dot" next to their name when they explicitly say "I am running" or form an exploratory committee or something similar. Mentionables get struck when they explicitly say "not running." Then there's the special cases -- those that get struck because I happen to think that they'll never run due to significant events that intervene, such as losing another election in the meanwhile or becoming embroiled in scandal quagmire. These people may not even realize themselves that they won't run, and that's the class that C. Christie falls into. Others who will never run for anything ever (D. Trump, T. Nugent) don't get struck because their jokiness deserves recognition.

To reiterate -- in my opinion C. Christie will not run for president. He may not even serve out his current term as governor. It's funny to see him out there doing his dance while the curtain is already falling. I'll admit, he had a good thing going before his ham-handed political brutality alerted the world that he's a generator of massive corruption, New Jersey style.
Click to expand...

That works for me.
 
Puppycow said:
How low can she go:
Michele Bachmann: Gays Want To Let Adults 'Freely Prey On Little Children Sexually'
Click to expand...

WTF?!
“This is a revolution that we are encountering now,” she said of marriage equality. “For all of the thousands of years of recorded human history, about 5,000 years, there is no instance of any culture, nation or tribe ever having as the established standard for marriage anything other than between man and woman. It may have been multiple women and a man, it may have been something like that, but it was always between men and women.” - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...little-children-sexually#sthash.hxCYJRFH.dpuf​

So, do Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden1 no longer fall under the definition of being "any culture, nation or tribe"?


Does she really believe the nonsense she spouts or is she just counting on her target audience to be too ignorant and too America-centric to understand that she is lying?

...............
(1) Partial list of the dozen or so countries which recognize gay marriage.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom