• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

It's time for a Marco Rubio thread?

Doghouse Reilly said:
One thing you can say about Marco Rubio is, he has the biggest ears in proportion to his head of any of the candidates. Ever since I noticed that, I've found it hard to not focus on them when I watch him talk. They're more apparent if you click on the image to expand it. I don't know if his ears will help him or hurt him if he becomes president.

http://imgur.com/gallery/0lXjCz9
Click to expand...

On the bright side you can pick him up by those ears like any other dog.




Note: I like dogs more than I like most republickers so I would never pick a dog up by the ears.
 
aleCcowaN said:
If you debate just to pull concessions, he didn't. If you read other's posts trying to get the meaning, he did. Though I agree the wage source is pretty lame.
Click to expand...

I asked a specific question in regards to a post he made. He chose not to answer that but to answer a question I hadn't asked. I wasn't looking for concessions, I was looking for an actual response.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
And the winner of the Damning With Faint Praise gold medal...

Anyway, Mr. Rubio, among his stellar qualifications, is a complete climate change denier. I will relish his eventual defeat.
Click to expand...
He gives the impression of being in far over his head. Clinton would chew him to pieces.
 
Amusingly the Trump fans/neo-Nazis/MRA idiots are claiming that Rubio's result in Iowa was fraudulent, spreading lies about his connections with/donations from Microsoft and attempting to smear him as gay.
:rolleyes:
 
thaiboxerken said:
It is interesting how conservatives try to justify the pay inequality instead of addressing it as a problem.
Click to expand...

It's a manufactured "problem" invented by feminists to give themselves a spot in the grievance line of the grievance party.
 
Returning to the actual topic of the thread, after Santorum withdrew and endorsed Rubio, he was asked which of Rubio's accomplishments he admired. He couldn't name one.
 
Trebuchet said:
Returning to the actual topic of the thread, after Santorum withdrew and endorsed Rubio, he was asked which of Rubio's accomplishments he admired. He couldn't name one.
Click to expand...

He couldn't bring himself to endorse the evil Cruz so he went with next-most-godly I suppose.
 
Trebuchet said:
Returning to the actual topic of the thread, after Santorum withdrew and endorsed Rubio, he was asked which of Rubio's accomplishments he admired. He couldn't name one.
Click to expand...

Marrying a Miami Dolphins cheerleader is at the top of my list.
 
Rubio is really starting to scare me. Not only he had the "generous" economic support of the infamous Paul Singer but now those stealth anonymous contributions with the suggestion some casino owner is behind it -I think it a way to conceal much worse backing, like the defense industry-.:eek: Certainly baby-face Rubio strikes me as someone who can perfectly buy into the next military adventure and resource consuming quagmire.
 
Please stop with the derails.

That being said, here are some examples that show Rubio is anti-science, but not completely so. He isn't the worst of the Republican pack so there is that....

He certainly denies anthropomorphic global warming (**AGW) by using the usual denier tactics:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astr...change_marco_rubio_doubts_global_warming.html

But when it comes to the age of the Earth, he at least waffles his answer there depending on the crowd he is speaking to:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astr...th_is_known_scientifically_but_we_should.html

He follows most Republicans in wanting to repeal Obamacare without a plan in place to replace it first, leaving millions without insurance and the ability to pay for it.

He is strongly opposed to 'Net Neutrality' which is a big no-no in my book.

He thinks marriage should be between a man and a woman only, but stated he will respect the Supreme Court's ruling thankfully.

He wants to undo Obama's work with Cuba and be sure that Cuba remains on the list of states that sponsor terror.

Like the rest of the republican field, he wants to scrap the Iran nuclear deal and slap more sanctions on them. He was one of the 47 senators who signed a warning letter to Iran's leaders directly when the world was trying to work out the nuclear deal.

Here is a nice breakdown from PBS:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/marco-rubio-believe-candidate-stands-10-issues/


**Note that this is NOT the thread to discuss things like AGW science. Take that elsewhere. This is to simply state his stances.
 
foophil said:
Please stop with the derails.

That being said, here are some examples that show Rubio is anti-science, but not completely so. He isn't the worst of the Republican pack so there is that....

He certainly denies anthropomorphic global warming (**AGW) by using the usual denier tactics:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astr...change_marco_rubio_doubts_global_warming.html

But when it comes to the age of the Earth, he at least waffles his answer there depending on the crowd he is speaking to:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astr...th_is_known_scientifically_but_we_should.html

He follows most Republicans in wanting to repeal Obamacare without a plan in place to replace it first, leaving millions without insurance and the ability to pay for it.

He is strongly opposed to 'Net Neutrality' which is a big no-no in my book.

He thinks marriage should be between a man and a woman only, but stated he will respect the Supreme Court's ruling thankfully.

He wants to undo Obama's work with Cuba and be sure that Cuba remains on the list of states that sponsor terror.

Like the rest of the republican field, he wants to scrap the Iran nuclear deal and slap more sanctions on them. He was one of the 47 senators who signed a warning letter to Iran's leaders directly when the world was trying to work out the nuclear deal.

Here is a nice breakdown from PBS:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/marco-rubio-believe-candidate-stands-10-issues/


**Note that this is NOT the thread to discuss things like AGW science. Take that elsewhere. This is to simply state his stances.
Click to expand...

If you don't want to derail the discussion into AGW, then I suggest you don't use tendentious language like "the usual denier tactics."
 
Mr. Rubio is a climate change denier. Such a position is 100% in error. Those who would take issue with that incontrovertible truth, irrespective of the senator's ignorance and/or pandering, are the thread derailers.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Mr. Rubio is a climate change denier. Such a position is 100% in error. Those who would take issue with that incontrovertible truth, irrespective of the senator's ignorance and/or pandering, are the thread derailers.
Click to expand...

Riiight. Because, as foophil's link says, "the time for debate is over." Who gets to decide when the debate is over? Also, when was Rule 11 expanded to treat anything that foophil or Mr. Kcin disagrees with as a derail?
 
foophil said:
How was my added comment a thread derail? If you feel it was, please report it. I won't mind.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was. You're the one who expressed a desire to not have the thread derailed into a different discussion. If that is indeed your desire, then your strategy was not a good one.
 
sunmaster14 said:
I didn't say it was. You're the one who expressed a desire to not have the thread derailed into a different discussion. If that is indeed your desire, then your strategy was not a good one.
Click to expand...

I'm still not following. In my defense, there are three types of folks out there regarding AGW. Those who accept it is happening, those who don't, and those who aren't sure. Rubio has publicly stated he denies AGW is happening. He does so using the standard reasons that are common to the 'AGW denialists' group. My comment was merely factual. I stated what his position was and his reasons for it with a few simple words.
 
foophil said:
I'm still not following. In my defense, there are three types of folks out there regarding AGW. Those who accept it is happening, those who don't, and those who aren't sure. Rubio has publicly stated he denies AGW is happening. He does so using the standard reasons that are common to the 'AGW denialists' group. My comment was merely factual. I stated what his position was and his reasons for it with a few simple words.
Click to expand...

Here's an example:

Marco Rubio is a Roman Catholic(*), which sucks because Roman Catholics are evil and they condone child molestation, and they all believe that the Pope, who is a hypocritical dickwad, is infallible (**).

*Note that this is NOT the thread to discuss things like religion and Roman Catholicism. Take that elsewhere. This is to simply state what his religion is.

**I don't actually believe any of that. Some of my best Catholics are friends.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom