Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
TULedHead

The Next President of the USA will be?

Who will win the Presidency in 2008?  

282 members have voted

  1. 1. Who Wins in 2008?

    • Hillary Clinton
      47
    • Rudy Giuliani
      9
    • John Edwards
      7
    • Mike Huckabee
      7
    • John McCain
      42
    • Barack Obama
      136
    • Ron Paul
      21
    • Mitt Romney
      9
    • Bill Richardson
      1
    • Fred Thompson
      3


Recommended Posts

according to the poll in this thread.. so far..

11 of 17 total votes are for the Dem candidates.

...and 7 of those 11 votes are for Hillary Clinton.

in other words..

This poll shows Hillary owning the GOP. B)

But its not a random sampling of people this is Zeppelin fans what about Hank sr and Skynyrd and Hip Hop ,Rap we must vote and wait for the results.I believe it will be a republican by the way thanks for the tax breaks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Hermit's pretty good at that. :lol:

:D

I certainly remembered Steve and TULed's bold predictions from back in December. However,

as much as I'd like to take the credit, in truth it's Magic Sam who actually deserves the credit.

..he did the digging *a few days ago*. I merely followed up on it once I saw Steve posting in another thread.

Good goin' Sam! :beer:

I agree though, Lakey,.. I don't expect we'll be seeing TULed any time soon.

Not, that is, until he decides to predict that John McCain will be the next POTUS.

[maybe he'll even post a picture of himself posing with the old guy. :P:lol: ]

------

btw..

Did you read that Combover McCain flip-flopped on the waterboarding issue?

As recently as November he was steadfast in his oposition to waterboarding,

and yet yesterday in the Senate he voted against a ban on waterboarding.

McCain's red shift on torture

On the unpopular war with Iraq, Sen. John McCain says he is "prepared to sacrifice whatever was necessary in order to stand up for what I believe in." Torture is pretty unpopular, so you'd think it'd be a helluva lot easier for the former POW to stick to his guns on the issue.

And you'd be wrong:

It's a mighty fine line to walk. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) opposes torture. But when the Senate held a vote yesterday that would effectively prevent the CIA from employing torture by restricting interrogation techniques to those under the Army Field Manual, he voted against it ...

But by voting against the bill, McCain is saying that the CIA should have a free hand to employ techniques along these lines. At the same time, he stresses that the 2006 Detainee Treatment Act, the bill he himself sponsored, prohibits the use of any cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment and treatment that "shocks the conscience." He hasn't said which of the techniques listed above meet that description. But he trusts that the Justice Department and CIA will arrive at a "good faith interpretation of the statutes that guide what is permissible."

Of course, all candidates pander, and it's expected that much of what anyone running for president does is tinged with cynicism. Indeed, McCain needs to endear himself to the GOP's conservative base fast. But as my former boss Matt Welch points out in his book, McCain has spent practically his entire political career carefully crafting his image of honor and integrity. And this is torture, for crying out loud -- something which McCain himself endured for more than five years in Vietnam.

With McCain's most recent flip-flop, perhaps it'll become clear how genuine his aura of honor and integrity is.

*source*

Waterboarding-Definition-Wikipedia24dec05a.jpg

John McCain.. a victim of torture as a POW in Vietnam,..

..now a proponent of torture as candidate for POTUS.

go figure. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Herm. I'm proud of that post. I did NOT go digging for it, I merely waited for what I said would happen. Dig a little deeper and you'll find that I spent this entire thread pointing out that "Multiple Choice" Mitt Romney is a panderer of the first order. And what do you know? The conservative voters who were supposed to buy his newly minted conservative stance voted for Huckabee and the moderates he was supposed to command based on his successful gubernatorial campaign voted for McCain. First he hates McCain, and now . . . he loves him. From Abortion to Gay Rights, there's no issue big or small that Romney can't flip on. I hope all you respected members on the right side of the aisle will continue to see through his bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cast my vote for the humping dog, not because he is reluctant to divulge in heinous activity, but because time and time again, he proves to be the only worthy reciprocant to nauvus behavior.

*spelling is not a necessity at this time.

Brought to you by nature's own supple bosom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitt Romney's teenie weenie was enough of a small clam his magic underwater wasn't enough to hoard away the tiny fairies.

I like acid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama bill: $845 billion more for global poverty

Sen. Barack Obama, perhaps giving America a preview of priorities he would pursue if elected president, is rejoicing over the Senate committee passage of a plan that could end up costing taxpayers billions of dollars in an attempt to reduce poverty in other nations.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=...mp;pageId=56405

super.jpg.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama bill: $845 billion more for global poverty

Sen. Barack Obama, perhaps giving America a preview of priorities he would pursue if elected president, is rejoicing over the Senate committee passage of a plan that could end up costing taxpayers billions of dollars in an attempt to reduce poverty in other nations.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=...mp;pageId=56405

super.jpg.jpg

I would rather see money spent on that instead of unprovoked wars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hermit has gleefully gone grave digging to find a post I made to this thread nearly three months ago wherein I decreed Mitt Romney would be the next President of the

United States.

I've come all the way back down here into the basement of the site to say I have been

proven wrong on this point. In my defense, I had no idea at the time Romney would

cut and run from his campaign in an attempt to preserve his war chest with an eye on

the elections in 2012.

Today, Romney gave McCain his endorsement, something he was unwilling to do during

his formal concession speech. One has to wonder, today being Valentine's Day and all,

if McCain in turn gave him a sweetheart kiss, or something similar such as an agreement

that Romney shall run as his VP. If this is the case, you heard it here first.

Ultimately, come 2012 I think you have to ask yourself if a man who cut and run from a

leadership position in 2008 and sold out to a man he refused to endorse a week prior is the best candidate for the Leader of the Free World job. I think not.

Steve,

Mitt simply saw the writing on the wall. McCain wasn't going to be beaten after his victory in Florida. Romney faced a huge uphill battle against McCain AND Huckabee, who is good at garnering support from evangelicals who would likely vote for Romney if Huckabee weren't in the race.

So my question then is why are you so down on Romney for being realistic? Romney was a relatively unknown political figure this year and has turned himself into a household name after the strong campaign he ran. He is positioned well for a run in 2012, which seems likely right now with the strong appeal that Obama has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see you two visit the thread at last, but aren't you forgetting something?

Trust a Mitt supporter to flip flop on the providing the drinks issue.

WHERE THE HELL IS MY GUINESS ALREADY? beer.gif

C'mon, be men. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting on those two rounds of Guinesses, Sam.

TULed is not man enough to make good on his lost wager. He talks

the talk, but when it comes time to walk the walk, he runs.. away. :rolleyes:

Hey, at least he restrained himself from guaranteeing

that Mitt the Twit will win the 2012 election though. :lol:

^_^

:hippy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't hold your breath waiting on those two rounds of Guinesses, Sam.

TULed is not man enough to make good on his lost wager. He talks

the talk, but when it comes time to walk the walk, he runs.. away. :rolleyes:

Hey, at least he restrained himself from guaranteeing

that Mitt the Twit will win the 2012 election though. :lol:

^_^

:hippy:

I'm surprised they haven't tried to spin it as though they were talking about 2012 in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can I believe that Mitt won't flip flop on his pledge to stand fast against terror when you, his supporters, won't follow through on your pledge of rounds for the house?

BEER ME!!!!!!! :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How can I believe that Mitt won't flip flop on his pledge to stand fast against terror when you, his supporters, won't follow through on your pledge of rounds for the house?

BEER ME!!!!!!! :angry:

How can anyone believe that Mitt the Twit won't flip flop on his pledge to stand fast against terror when

he was so quick to cut and run.. to surrender.. in the face of a little presidential primary opposition?

..opposition in the form of a 72 year old man and a man armed to the hilt with a Bible, no less. :rolleyes:

*in an undisclosed bunker somewhere in Ohio*

nobeer.jpg

Damn you, TULed!!! :angry:

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two guys whose mothers neglected to teach them how to step up and be a man and honorably admit when they are wrong.

Particularly when having wagered a round of drinks- not following through on such a statement goes beyond forum guidelines, it violates the guy code. And that shit is fucking sacred, you welchers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Two guys whose mothers neglected to teach them how to step up and be a man and honorably admit when they are wrong.

Particularly when having wagered a round of drinks- not following through on such a statement goes beyond forum guidelines, it violates the guy code. And that shit is fucking sacred, you welchers.

Scroll up the thread. I already came back down here to say I was wrong. Can't win for losing around here. You keep talking about buying you a beer but don't say where.

You must know this is the best that can be done online: :beer:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scroll up the thread. I already came back down here to say I was wrong. Can't win for losing around here. You keep talking about buying you a beer but don't say where.

You must know this is the best that can be done online: :beer:

And now you've done it. I'll at least give you credit for that. TULed, can you man up and admit that you were wrong? Waiting for my second round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And now you've done it. I'll at least give you credit for that. TULed, can you man up and admit that you were wrong? Waiting for my second round.

Consider yourself lucky, Sam.

The best I got was (paraphrased) "I'm gonna be at Knebworth

Exhibition Park next week.. if you're in the neighborhood.."

I settled for the above-referenced admission of wrongness. ;)

^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Today, Romney gave McCain his endorsement, something he was unwilling to do during

his formal concession speech. One has to wonder, today being Valentine's Day and all,

if McCain in turn gave him a sweetheart kiss, or something similar such as an agreement

that Romney shall run as his VP. If this is the case, you heard it here first.

I am not a Romney defender or a very big fan of his, but you seem to have no understanding of how the big stakes political game works. Of course Romney needed to wait a week or so before endorsing McCain-- because do it too soon after dropping out would not have seemed sincere. And in addition, Romney has no choice but to endorse McCain and make peace with the party if he is ever to have any further political career. What's so surpising about that? This is always the way it's done.

Ultimately, come 2012 I think you have to ask yourself if a man who cut and run from a

leadership position in 2008 and sold out to a man he refused to endorse a week prior is the best candidate for the Leader of the Free World job. I think not.

Romney didn't "cut and run", he was beat and he knew it. Reagan did the same thing after failing in his bid to get the party nomination in 1976 when he tried to the incumbent Gerald Ford. (Ford was had been serving out the remainder of Nixon's term.) That was a bitter fight too, but when the writing on the wall was clear, Reagan made his peace the party and campaigned for Ford.

Like I said, this is just the way this party politics stuff works. Where have you been?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll stick my support behind whichever President will finally support gay marriage. I think that was Dennis Kucinich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...