MASSIVE Erection Thread 2016 - Lizard has the advantage. Trump is spiraling towards defeat.

  • Thread starter Thread starter JU 199
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
First title
NEtitle.png


second title
title2.png


third title
US 2016 Presidential election Trump victory leaves rivals distressed and confused Kiwi Farms.png


Fourth title
trumptitle4.png


Fifth and Sixth title
new title (1).png


Seventh title
Screenshot_2016-06-07-12-33-22.png


eighth title
Apocalypse 2016.png


Ninth title
Screenshot_2016-07-25-23-47-41~2.jpg


tenth title
title10.png


All discussion of the candidates, updates and results should go here

For example- here's a video of Ted Cruz vying for world domination.


Also Hilary Clinton is a crook and nobody should have sex with her.

Discuss

(Note- The title will change as we get nearer the election, previous titles will be archived in the OP)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
So Donald has over performed again and betting markets are putting him at a 75% chance of winning the nomination. They really need to stop him in Indiana now.

Also Cruz only got three measly delegates. :story:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yall voters should have just swallowed your pride and voted McCain.

Stupid Sarah Palin, notwithstanding.
 
TrippinKahlua said:
Yall voters should have just swallowed your pride and voted McCain.

Stupid Sarah Palin, notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
If anything Romney should have been elected in 2012. While Americans may still have been divided, at the very least they likely would have been less divided than they are under Obama. And the election outcomes likely would not be anywhere near as depressing as they are...
 
DirkBloodStormKing said:
If anything Romney should have been elected in 2012. While Americans may still have been divided, at the very least they likely would have been less divided than they are under Obama. And the election outcomes likely would not be anywhere near as depressing as they are...
Click to expand...
What exactly did Obama do to divide the country?

One of the biggest complaints of him on the left is that he spent far too much time in the first couple of years of his term trying to act, "above partisanship," and refused to publicly take sides on issues in Congress between the Democratic majority and Republican minority, despite the fact the Democrats were following his lead in trying to extend a grapevine to the Republicans, and the Republicans were just unilaterally obstructing him whenever possible. Obama spent months when he had a super majority in Congress, which meant that he didn't even have to attempt to negotiate with Republicans at all, trying desperately to negotiate with a right that was absolutely opposed to anything he did. The Republicans literally started off Obama's term with the Senate Minority Leader announcing that their goal was to make Obama a one term president above anything else. And today they are opposing any and all nominees he puts forth to the Supreme Court based on a random argument that has never once been used before.

How exactly would have been electing a president from this side divided the country less?

Edit:
In other news.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-cruz-idUSKCN0XO26H

Cruz seems to be announcing his VP pick should he ultimately win, which would be Carly Fiorina, in a couple hours.

Nominees traditionally wait until they've already locked up the nomination before announcing a VP, but with Trump's victories the last two weeks, it makes sense that Cruz pulls out Fiorina now in an attempt to try to slow Trump down just enough to force a contested convention. Reagan used a similar strategy in 1976, with him announcing just before the convention that the moderate Senator Richard Schweiker would be his VP if he won the contested convention that day. He still lost the nomination, only to come back and win it in 1980 with H. Bush, but deviations to the traditional VP nomination has certainly been used, and 2016 has undoubtedly been a very weird election so far.
 
Last edited:
Will a hillary goverment improve immigration?
In 6 years I intend to leave for America for good,will it be easier to me if hillary wins now?
My degree will be a stem one.
 
And the Cruzmissle picks it's backup targeting system to come from former HP execs.

(Ted Cruz picks Carly Fiorina as his VP)


What a horrid choice.
 
melty said:
Why Fiorina? It's like they aren't even trying anymore.
Click to expand...
Because Trump's numbers with women are terrible. Plus, she helps to emphasize his outsider status and brings "business experience" to the table. Mostly the former, though. His campaign probably thinks that will help them keep Trump from 1,237 delegates.

This is also the first time since Ronald Reagan's bid in 1976 that a candidate has named a running mate without first securing their party's nomination. That's another reason that Fiorina was picked, since most people wouldn't want to make such a risky move by joining Cruz's ticket. Also, most people hate Cruz.

In addition, this takes away Trump's "five state sweep" narrative.
 
Picklechu said:
Because Trump's numbers with women are terrible. Plus, she helps to emphasize his outsider status and brings "business experience" to the table. Mostly the former, though. His campaign probably thinks that will help them keep Trump from 1,237 delegates.

This is also the first time since Ronald Reagan's bid in 1976 that a candidate has named a running mate without first securing their party's nomination. That's another reason that Fiorina was picked, since most people wouldn't want to make such a risky move by joining Cruz's ticket. Also, most people hate Cruz.

In addition, this takes away Trump's "five state sweep" narrative.
Click to expand...
Surely there's another republican woman who would be a better pick? Fiorina wasn't all that popular.
 
melty said:
Surely there's another republican woman who would be a better pick? Fiorina wasn't all that popular.
Click to expand...
But who else is well-known enough, and, more importantly, would want to? Despite what she said last year, Fiorina was always running for VP.
 
DirkBloodStormKing said:
If anything Romney should have been elected in 2012. While Americans may still have been divided, at the very least they likely would have been less divided than they are under Obama. And the election outcomes likely would not be anywhere near as depressing as they are...
Click to expand...
It probably would've delayed the current populist insurgency on both sides for one or two election cycles, but it wouldn't have stopped it completely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom