Not much time left but what is your prediction?

That freak show last night just kept sounding like this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8TMTiw1LZo

I'm watching it until I feel like vomiting...then I switch back to Bitchin Rides.

What s bunch of Bozo, goofballs and Crackpots.

The debate that is.

Where's Uncle Joe?

If I was s a democrat I'd feel very very embarrassed.

Webb looks like a Pez Dispenser Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

Now you know how the dems feel watching a republican debate.

What kind of TV viewership did it get?

What kind of TV viewership did it get? Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

What does that matter? Train wrecks always get better numbers and this forum alone is proof that people don't really care about actual discourse regarding the issues, so your question is moot. What they didn't do was make racially insensitive remarks or denigrate women.

I see you've posted that twice....you're wrong you know. It's actually called "supply side" economics and has been around longer than Reagan was in office. It does work. During Reagan's time taxes went down and revenues went up.

Anyway, I was disappointed in Webb. I saw him in person back in the 80s and maybe it was because I knew what he was talking about and it made sense. I have read three or four of his books. He was too stiff and his answers were too technical for your rank and file democrats. It just went over their heads. Hillary sidestepped any real answers on so many things; Russia, Syria, ISIS, Iran, Keystone, etc. I guess you could say that Sanders won because he probably did himself the most good. In fact, I think Sanders was looking for a VP slot. He saved Hillary's ass on Benghazi and the emails. Being VP is kind of like a well paid retirement. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You're actually incorrect, but then that's familiar territory for Rear Admiral Turd Cutter. Supply side, trickle down, whatever you want to call it, doesn't work.

Secondly, Reagan raised taxes 11 times, so you're a bit disingenuous on that one as well. Federal taxes were 19.6 percent of GDP at the beginning of his presidency and 18.2 when he left office. A small reduction, but he understood one thing, you need to balance tax increases with spending cuts.

"A 2012 study by the Tax Justice Network indicates that wealth of the super-rich does not trickle down to improve the economy, but tends to be amassed and sheltered in tax havens with a negative effect on the tax bases of the home economy."

http://www.theguardian.com/business/...omy-tax-havens

Hillary summed up the night when she got into that stump speech/populous/progressive/socialist mode......"free college for everyone, free health care for everyone, free everything for everyone, and I know we can do it because I'm going to make the "rich" pay for it".

I put "rich" in quotation marks because what the Dems call "rich", and what most Americans call "rich" can be two different things.

Who is going to pay for it? The rich. You know the very rich, the ones who can and will leave the country for greener pastures (ask the British about this). Then who pays for all this stuff? The middle class is who will be stuck with the bill.

Who is going to pay for it? The rich. You know the very rich, the ones who can and will leave the country for greener pastures (ask the British about this). Then who pays for all this stuff? The middle class is who will be stuck with the bill. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Did you ever think there are things we could cut?

Did you ever think there are things we could cut? Originally Posted by WombRaider

Cut Federal benefits to Gloryhole operators and cowardly social dumbascraps from Arkansas that spam ECCIE's political forum ! :wo ot_jump:

Now you know how the dems feel watching a republican debate. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

How do the "dems feel watching a republican debate'?

Actually, how would you know?

I put "rich" in quotation marks because what the Dems call "rich", and what most Americans call "rich" can be two different things. Originally Posted by Jackie S

You mean like when someone stuffs money in a "fund" to errr...."shelter" it?

Kinda like keeping the "incriminating" emails on a private server.

Did you ever think there are things we could cut? Originally Posted by WombRaider

Your're a liberal. Besides the military, you never cut shit so don't even go there.

Your're a liberal. Besides the military, you never cut shit so don't even go there. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You really need to invest in something other than a Kindle. It's making you look like a fucking moron.

And yet again, you've shown you're a dumbass of epic proportions. I'd be willing to talk cuts on anything, including the military.

How do the "dems feel watching a republican debate'?

Actually, how would you know? Originally Posted by LexusLover

It's like watching a train wreck. You just can't look away. I can understand how the democratic debate might not have held your attention. There was no reality show vibe, no one calling everyone 'losers' and no denigration of women. It's not a place you would feel at home.

You really need to invest in something other than a Kindle. It's making you look like a fucking moron.

And yet again, you've shown you're a dumbass of epic proportions. I'd be willing to talk cuts on anything, including the military. Originally Posted by WombRaider

And yet you manage everyday without that handicap.


Anybody know what is wrong with posting with a Kindle? The baby killer wants to make it an issue for some reason.