CPAC Straw Poll
 

The "straw poll" taken at the CPAC meeting had Ram Paul leading everyone with over 26 percent of the votes. Rubio got only 3 percent which was the same as Trump. Walker of Wisconsin got 21 percent.

Basically, none of these clowns could hope to beat Hillary Clinton on their best day.

These wingnuts had better find a way of being more inclusive to women, all minorities, young voters, gay and lesbians voters, and start voting for issues that concern this bloc of voters.

One can only conclude from this post that it is impossible for you to address anything without the usual name calling or pigeon holing of other posters.

Worst of all continuing to make complete and totally invalid assumptions (as you have in past threads) that
women, all minorities, young voters, gay and lesbians voters are locked up by the democratic party and there are NONE with an opposing alignment.

One can only discredit their position with this behavior and off the wall assumptions.

Must be operating on the assumption that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth (for some).

How about a double dog dare to make your point without disparaging others or their thoughts?

More baiting.:icon_bored:

[QUOTE=Guest;1021944]One can only conclude from this post that it is impossible for you to address anything without the usual name calling or pigeon holing of other posters.

Worst of all continuing to make complete and totally invalid assumptions (as you have in past threads) that
women, all minorities, young voters, gay and lesbians voters are locked up by the democratic party and there are NONE with an opposing alignment.

One can only discredit their position with this behavior and off the wall assumptions.

Must be operating on the assumption that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth (for some).

How about a double dog dare to make your point without disparaging others or their thoughts?[/QUOTE

The CPAC is over and all the speakers climbed into their one clown car and left National Harbor. :wave:

I will give it to you that there are some of the women, minorities, young voters, gays and lesbians who will vote for Republicans and who do like their conservative viewpoints - but the overwhelming number will vote liberal. If you can prove different, show me a citation.

George W Bush got 45% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, John McCain got 37% in 2008, and Mitt Romney got 27% in 2012. Anyone notice a trend developing? Also, Barack Obama got 95% of the black vote in 2012.

Therefore the worst dem fear is a black republican that speaks spanish against a white democrat:sigh:

How shallow can you get? Are you placing all of the GOP hopes on the color of their candidate's skin and their linguistic abilities? Good luck with that.

Can Ben Carson speak Spanish? I guess you need not worry, he is honesty so intelligent that he could learn Spanish before the primaries.

The biggest challenge for the democrats would be a republican who supports a pathway to citizenship for 11,000,000 undocumented residents, who supports a woman's right to choose (the law of the land), same sex marriage (which will soon become the law of the land), raising the minimum wage, and universal health care.

It's not the color of the next candidate's skin, or the languages he/she speaks, or his or her gender, but the policies he/she is espousing.

Now why in the :swear: is it OK for one to take credit for a black candidate pulling the vote but not the opposotion.

It must be pure hell trying to get around on one way streets all the time.

Since there is no ignore button I will no longer participate in a merry go round waste of time.

My focus for 2016 is going to be on the candidate that can walk into the widow maker left behind by Obama and reaffirm our adherence to the US Constitution, turn the economy around, reset relationships with our allies, repeal ObamaCare and ObamaNet, Dodd-Frank, remove the mountains of unnecessary regulations are that are strangling businesses , streamline our tax system and remove the loopholes and freebies utilized to garner votes resulting in making us competitive nationally nd internationally.

The social issues such as abortion, same sex marriage, etc are issues I will ignore and issues I believe should be decided by the people via state referendums.

I am inclined to believe that a truly conservative candidate is needed to right the wrongs of the Obama Administration. I am inclined to believe that Jeb Bush is not that candidates and that he will only siphon votes and campaign contribution from viable candidates.

If my recollection is right the reason Romney lost was because far too many white voters did not vote in 2012 because they viewed Romney not to be conservative enough.

I voted for Romney because he was the only candidate I believed carried with him a moral imperative.

Gob Bless This Nation

So much for the "pact" in the previous thread ...

My focus for 2016 is going to be on the candidate that can walk in the same shoes as Obama and continue the policies that has reaffirmed our standing as great nation. These last 6 years, our economy has turned around with businesses turning in record profits, unemployment is way down with more jobs being created since the 1990's, taken our troops out of harms way in a futile land war, addressed our health care crisis with ObamaCare, implemented Dodd-Frank to help prevent future bailouts, pursued environmental regulations to address air, water and climate change, pursued changes in our tax system to remove the loopholes so that companies that take advantage of our infrastructure also pay for it.

Also, he has supported social issues such as abortion, same sex marriage.

I sincerely hope we continue this path.

One has to love this nation!

Far too many white voters did not vote because they did not think Romney was conservative enough? Who the heck did they think would win if they did not vote? It is good that brain-dead people like that did not vote!

The right for women to choose is the law of the land. Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. Gay marriage will soon be the law of the land. Get out of the 19th century and deal with it!

The economy has been turned around. Read the newspapers and stop listening to Fox.

so waht does the law of the land supposed to mean.
We are in an era where the laws are not worth the paper they are written upon.
No enforcement to selective enforcement of existing laws.

Best example? ILLEGAL immigration. COming in by the thousands daily without the need for a single question just c'mon in and sign up for your benefits.

In recent years the law of the land has lost it's luster.....hence it is not impressive as it used to be and contributes no more validity than a current opinion...right or wrong does not matter much on too many issues.