Sarah Palin running in 2016

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Btw, I have absolutely no idea what "2013 gun control debacle" you're referring to

I'm referring to the one where Mr. Obama wasted all of his political capital waging a futile attack against the indomitable might of the NRA. It was the sole political event of the first six months of his second term.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:
Btw, I have absolutely no idea what "2013 gun control debacle" you're referring to

I'm referring to the one where Mr. Obama wasted all of his political capital waging a futile attack against the indomitable might of the NRA. It was the sole political event of the first six months of his second term.

A total non-event, imo. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if the NRA was in on this piece of political theater. [nudge-nudge wink-wink.] I doubt that Obama had any expectation (or even desire, for that matter) that stringent gun control legislation might succeed, and the NRA leadership knew it and did not resent the new POTUS trying to look like he was trying to keep at least one campaign promise. Well...sort of promise. Strong as the NRA lobby is, gun control is hardly an issue except in the minds of some paranoid gun owners.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

A total non-event, imo. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if the NRA was in on this piece of political theater. [nudge-nudge wink-wink.] I doubt that Obama had any expectation (or even desire, for that matter) that stringent gun control legislation might succeed, and the NRA leadership knew it and did not resent the new POTUS trying to look like he was trying to keep at least one campaign promise. Well...sort of promise. Strong as the NRA lobby is, gun control is hardly an issue except in the minds of some paranoid gun owners.

Mr. Obama poured every bit of his political energy into trying to get that unconstitutional abomination passed. And the result of his defeat is that he did not have any political capital left to achieve any other legislative victory in his second term.

Far from a non-event, by the time the next election rolls around, it will have been a long six years since Mr. Obama has managed to get any legislation passed through Congress. That is going to result in a change in which party controls the White House in 2016.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Where is your brain? Obama accomplished much working through the cement fence the republicans constructed around every issue.
You're dumber than a piece of shet.
Our economy continues to grow while the rest of the world struggles.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

I can just about guarantee that virtually nobody -- except about a dozen hard-core fools like yourself -- even remember this piece of historical trivia. It certainly has no chance of having any significant effect on the 2016 vote whatsoever. This is all in your mins, Oral, not in the real world.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

I can just about guarantee that virtually nobody -- except about a dozen hard-core fools like yourself -- even remember this piece of historical trivia. It certainly has no chance of having any significant effect on the 2016 vote whatsoever. This is all in your mins, Oral, not in the real world.

The fact that in 2016 it will have been a very long six years since the President got any legislation passed through Congress will not be historical trivia. It will be a live event, and many people will be aware of it.

And it will be the deciding factor in the 2016 election. It guarantees that control of the White House will switch parties.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Your opinions are 100% ignorance. You probably never heard about Hillary Clinton in your cave.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

You're right, of course, Oralloy: the electorate will remember that Obama has been unable to implement his programs because of GOP obstructionism. It can only benefit the Democrats. The GOP has shot itself in the foot -- again. I hope to god that "it will be the deciding factor in the 2016 election." The voters are not quite as stupid and gullible as you seem to think.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

You're right, of course, Oralloy: the electorate will remember that Obama has been unable to implement his programs because of GOP obstructionism.

The electorate is not going to blame the Republicans for the fact that Mr. Obama has been ineffective in getting laws passed.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

It can only benefit the Democrats.

Not exactly. It will lead to swapping which party controls the White House.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

The GOP has shot itself in the foot -- again.

Kind of like they shot themselves in the foot by nominating Ronald Reagan in 1980?

Lustig Andrei wrote:

I hope to god that "it will be the deciding factor in the 2016 election."

It will be. It will cause a swap in which party controls the White House.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

The voters are not quite as stupid and gullible as you seem to think.

What is it with the Left that they think that anyone who votes against them must be doing so out of stupidity?

It's really silly.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Dream on, son, dream on. I have nothing against optimism, even when it's so amusingly misplaced.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Dream on, son, dream on. I have nothing against optimism, even when it's so amusingly misplaced.

We'll see what happens on election day.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

The electorate is not going to blame the Republicans for the fact that Mr. Obama has been ineffective in getting laws passed.

You're totally ignorant on over 100% on the topics you seem oblivious to participate - to further embarrass yourself.
Do you know who McConell is?
How could you possibly know; your brain is dead. A new human phenomenon.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Gee, and here I thought it was congress that passed the laws. When did the president start this?

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

That should be spelled "McConnell"

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

Come on, you're not that stupid too.

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Gee, and here I thought it was congress that passed the laws. When did the president start this?

Don't confuse Oralloy with facts. His mind is already made up. He doesn't seem to understand that if a piece of legislation fails to get enacted, it's the doing of Congress, not the President. Don't disillusion the lad. Let him learn for himself when the next election rolls around.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

RABEL222 wrote:
Gee, and here I thought it was congress that passed the laws. When did the president start this?

Don't confuse Oralloy with facts. His mind is already made up. He doesn't seem to understand that if a piece of legislation fails to get enacted, it's the doing of Congress, not the President. Don't disillusion the lad. Let him learn for himself when the next election rolls around.

When did it start, you ask?

Presidents have been presenting their agendas to Congress and getting their programs passed since a guy named George Washington was elected to the office.

I believe 2016 will mark the first time that a president has not been able to advance a legislative agenda for six straight years.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Obama care?

0 Replies

Seeing a lot of articles these days on how the right is turning on Palin. Here is one: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/the-hard-right-skewers-sarah-palin-vindicates-kathleen-parker/244725/ It seems like after the horrible performance in Iowa, Palin is finally done.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Pundits on the right are turning on her. Her fans still worship her. I see it on my alternate FB account. The end-timers can't get enough of her.

1 Reply

Sarah Palin running in 2016

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know