Does anybody on this board want Trump to be President?

[Ivytalk]

They'd have to right now if we'd switch over to a Parliamentarian guvmint.

I don't see how a Parliamentarian government style would change anything at this point in time. Fvck, even in most Parliamentarian governments, even if they have a multitude of political parties, you still in the end wind up with two parties emerging as the dominant ones. Even worse, if we moved to a Parliamentarian government right now there would be a GOP President ( Prime Minister Trump if you will) as the GOP already dominates the legislature. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants for people who decry the status quo and think that change would alleviate all our problems. We don't have the problems we do today in America because of the Executive branch of government - I think having that structure is a good thing.

FIFY!

[GannonFan]

I don't see how a Parliamentarian government style would change anything at this point in time. Heck, even in most Parliamentarian governments, even if they have a multitude of political parties, you still in the end wind up with two parties emerging as the dominant ones. Even worse, if we moved to a Parliamentarian government right now there would be a GOP President ( Prime Minister Trump if you will) as the GOP already dominates the legislature. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants for people who decry the status quo and think that change would alleviate all our problems. We don't have the problems we do today in America because of the Executive branch of government - I think having that structure is a good thing.

Wider representation of views.

I don't think you really get that. Like I said, in our system you already have that happen - a third party movement gets started, normally being the outgrowth of a particular issue, and ultimately it gets incorporated into one or both of the major parties and then we return to the status quo of number of parties, but now with the views being addressed. Parliamentary systems work much the same way as the lines between the multiple parties blur as many parties share the same views on most issues. And in the end, it's still largely two parties that rise to the top. I just don't see how it would make a significant difference. And again, be careful what you wish for - the GOP would control the entire government right now if we were a parliamentary system based upon their success over the Dems pretty much everywhere other than the Presidential election.

[houndawg]

They'd have to right now if we'd switch over to a Parliamentarian guvmint.

I don't see how a Parliamentarian government style would change anything at this point in time. Heck, even in most Parliamentarian governments, even if they have a multitude of political parties, you still in the end wind up with two parties emerging as the dominant ones. Even worse, if we moved to a Parliamentarian government right now there would be a GOP President ( Prime Minister Trump if you will) as the GOP already dominates the legislature. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants for people who decry the status quo and think that change would alleviate all our problems. We don't have the problems we do today in America because of the Executive branch of government - I think having that structure is a good thing.

Other than an unnecessary war or two....

[GannonFan]

I don't see how a Parliamentarian government style would change anything at this point in time. Fvck, even in most Parliamentarian governments, even if they have a multitude of political parties, you still in the end wind up with two parties emerging as the dominant ones. Even worse, if we moved to a Parliamentarian government right now there would be a GOP President ( Prime Minister Trump if you will) as the GOP already dominates the legislature. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants for people who decry the status quo and think that change would alleviate all our problems. We don't have the problems we do today in America because of the Executive branch of government - I think having that structure is a good thing.

FIFY!

Gosh golly, I don't know what you mean by that combination of letters. Is that a word?

[Baldy]

And you're even more confused than when your nurse changed your diaper and rocked you to sleep last night.

Your heart ain't in it nomore, Balsdry..

Take a lesson from your boy Donald and don't become boring.


Fvcking conks have gone pussy on us without Tman around to tell them what they think.

No dawg, even after repeated attempts to teach you a thing or two, you still can't distinguish between people and what they say on this forum. You're confused. Have one of your great grandkids take notes for you or something. Exercise that little pea bouncing inside that Neanderthal skull balanced on your neck...please.

For someone who likes to talk so much shit, you can't even remember who says what on here. Your confusion makes me (and others I'm sure) laugh my ass off, but it's actually a cry for help. It's not that my heart "ain't in it nomore". It just gets old beating up on the old man who can't remember which shoe goes on which foot.

[Ivytalk]

FIFY!

Holy cunnilingus, I don't know what you mean by that combination of letters. Is that a word?

FIFY!

[GannonFan]

Holy cunnilingus, I don't know what you mean by that combination of letters. Is that a word?

FIFY!

Willikers, now I'm really befuddled. I don't ever come across this kind of language watching reruns of McHale's Navy and Leave it to Beaver. Sometimes I don't care for the language in Gomer Pyle, but I figured that was just Marine talk and all.

[houndawg]

Your heart ain't in it nomore, Balsdry..

Take a lesson from your boy Donald and don't become boring.


Fvcking conks have gone pussy on us without Tman around to tell them what they think.

No dawg, even after repeated attempts to teach you a thing or two, you still can't distinguish between people and what they say on this forum. You're confused. Have one of your great grandkids take notes for you or something. Exercise that little pea bouncing inside that Neanderthal skull balanced on your neck...please.

For someone who likes to talk so much ****, you can't even remember who says what on here. Your confusion makes me (and others I'm sure) laugh my ass off, but it's actually a cry for help. It's not that my heart "ain't in it nomore". It just gets old beating up on the old man who can't remember which shoe goes on which foot.

Good point, I guess I'll quit removing my shoes before kicking your ass. I was only trying to make it easier for you....

[Ivytalk]

FIFY!

Willikers, now I'm really befuddled. I don't ever come across this kind of language watching reruns of McHale's Navy and Leave it to Beaver. Sometimes I don't care for the language in Gomer Pyle, but I figured that was just Marine talk and all.

Heh, heh, heh! He said, "Beaver!"

[Ibanez]

FIFY!

Willikers, now I'm really befuddled. I don't ever come across this kind of language watching reruns of McHale's Navy and Leave it to Beaver. Sometimes I don't care for the language in Gomer Pyle, but I figured that was just Marine talk and all.

Are you serious?! The dirtiest thing ever said during the Golden Age of Television was on Leave it to Beaver.

[Baldy]

No dawg, even after repeated attempts to teach you a thing or two, you still can't distinguish between people and what they say on this forum. You're confused. Have one of your great grandkids take notes for you or something. Exercise that little pea bouncing inside that Neanderthal skull balanced on your neck...please.

For someone who likes to talk so much ****, you can't even remember who says what on here. Your confusion makes me (and others I'm sure) laugh my ass off, but it's actually a cry for help. It's not that my heart "ain't in it nomore". It just gets old beating up on the old man who can't remember which shoe goes on which foot.

Good point, I guess I'll quit removing my shoes before kicking your ass. I was only trying to make it easier for you....

I doubt you even remember how to untie your shoes...

[houndawg]

Good point, I guess I'll quit removing my shoes before kicking your ass. I was only trying to make it easier for you....

I doubt you even remember how to untie your shoes...

Apples and oranges my hairless friend - one is a complex task requiring superior motor skills and balance; the other one just requires you to be within boot range.

[JohnStOnge]

You know I forgot about that line below but I think she did say that. That's outstanding. I wonder if whoever wrote it knew what they were doing.

Looked it up just now and it was actually "Don’t you think you’re being a little bit hard on the Beaver?” Not quite as good but good.

[JohnStOnge]

Come inside, the show's about to start. Guaranteed, to BLOW YOUR HEAD APART.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeQsZOQqO6I[/youtube]

[Ibanez]

You know I forgot about that line below but I think she did say that. That's outstanding. I wonder if whoever wrote it knew what they were doing.

Looked it up just now and it was actually "Don’t you think you’re being a little bit hard on the Beaver?” Not quite as good but good.

Go back 2 posts.

[CAA Flagship]

You know I forgot about that line below but I think she did say that. That's outstanding. I wonder if whoever wrote it knew what they were doing.

Looked it up just now and it was actually "Don’t you think you’re being a little bit hard on the Beaver?” Not quite as good but good.

Go back 2 posts.

Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.

[SuperHornet]

USFL?

Have you already forgotten about that, Mark?

[Ibanez]

USFL?

Have you already forgotten about that, Mark?

Obviously.

[JohnStOnge]

Go back 2 posts.

Yes I was responding to that one.

[JohnStOnge]

Go back 2 posts.

Yes I was responding to that one.

[Baldy]

I doubt you even remember how to untie your shoes...

Apples and oranges my hairless friend - one is a complex task requiring superior motor skills and balance; the other one just requires you to be within boot range.

You don't have superior anything, and you're too scared of the other.

[DSUrocks07]

Speaking of the impact of third parties, or lack thereof, I'm rooting for both Trump and Sanders (who's handlers are making noise about how the Democratic party is handling the primary process when it comes to him vs Hillary) both go the independent route. Really turn 2016 into a clusterfuck.

[93henfan]

Speaking of the impact of third parties, or lack thereof, I'm rooting for both Trump and Sanders (who's handlers are making noise about how the Democratic party is handling the primary process when it comes to him vs Hillary) both go the independent route. Really turn 2016 into a clusterfuck.

It would simply increase Hillary's margin of victory.

[houndawg]

I'm just curious. I swear, I have yet to personally meet a single person that wants Trump to be President. Does anybody here want that?

My wife is on the State Republican Central Committee. She told me the other day that I need to vote for Trump if he does win the Republican nomination. I said no way. I said there's no way he could win anyway once he gets into a general election. She wondered about that and something occurred to me.

There I was saying there is no way I could vote for him. Usually when there is a Presidential election I will pick between the two candidates that have a chance to win. I'm one of those who thinks that if I don't do that I'm wasting my vote. So even if I might like a, say, Libertarian candidate more than the Republican I will vote for the Republican.

In this case there is no way I'm going to do that. No way I'd vote for HIllary either. But this would be the first election in which I would indeed vote for some candidate that's not from one of the two major parties. And I wonder how many other people who would normally vote for the Republican candidate would do that sort of thing...or maybe not vote at all...if that Trump buffoon turns out to be the Republican nominee.

[houndawg]

I'm just curious. I swear, I have yet to personally meet a single person that wants Trump to be President. Does anybody here want that?

My wife is on the State Republican Central Committee. She told me the other day that I need to vote for Trump if he does win the Republican nomination. I said no way. I said there's no way he could win anyway once he gets into a general election. She wondered about that and something occurred to me.

There I was saying there is no way I could vote for him. Usually when there is a Presidential election I will pick between the two candidates that have a chance to win. I'm one of those who thinks that if I don't do that I'm wasting my vote. So even if I might like a, say, Libertarian candidate more than the Republican I will vote for the Republican.

In this case there is no way I'm going to do that. No way I'd vote for HIllary either. But this would be the first election in which I would indeed vote for some candidate that's not from one of the two major parties. And I wonder how many other people who would normally vote for the Republican candidate would do that sort of thing...or maybe not vote at all...if that Trump buffoon turns out to be the Republican nominee.

Don't know how you can't see that the answer to your question is clearly "yes" - as evidenced by two terms of the miserable failure of Dubya Bush. If you're a conk you have to be looking at Dubya and comparing Trump favorably. He's the single candidate that would get conks out to vote on a rainy day. It is crystal clear that the conks are not the least bit serious about controlling the executive branch.