Dr. Ben Carson: "The issue is experience."

[akv]

Originally Posted by Dusty

Right now, conservatives clearly want an outsider.
What makes you think that'll change?
We're tired of grovelling-across-the-aisle, buttkissing, politically-correct liars on either side

I definitely agree with your last point. I think conservatives want to beat the Dims for the WH more than they want an outsider.

Zero, The economy, and Hillary's foibles have left the Dims as vulnerable as they have been in some time, however IMHO the GOP shoots itself in the foot with it's stance on domestic social issues which do not reflect changes across US society.

If the goal is to win, any GOP nominee for POTUS will get the conservative vote, it's the independent/undecided vote you need to win. The younger candidates don't seem as tied to these alienating domestic social issues.

To me Trump is a charismatic buffoon. He is entertaining but when it comes down to it I don't think most people will vote for his hubris. In addition for all his wealth, he seems incredibly petty and vindictive with his feuds etc. There is a venom in him common to truly small men. Contrast this with the magnanimous nature a Reagan or George Bush led with.

I like Dr. Carson, he just puts me to sleep whenever he speaks, for starters his eyes are already closed, second he whispers and it takes an eternity for him to get his point across. I think Hillary would eat him alive in the debates.

On the flip side Hillary isn't a particularly eloquent or gifted orator herself. Rubio, Cruz, or Christie would eat her lunch in debates just as Obama did.


I think until the GOP adapts and rolls out someone hungry and dynamic, they keep losing.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by akv

I think until the GOP adapts and rolls out someone hungry and dynamic, they keep losing.

All they have to roll out is someone who's not afraid to call a spade a spade and isn't a Mormon, this time, so all the nondems will get off the couch on Tuesday.

Trump and Carson have survived two hostile debates. Don't expect them to fade away if they're still leading after February. Any dirt would have already been aired. The slimeballs are already trying to soil Carson for beatin' up on a couple kids in grade school, etc., while giving Hillary a pass on everything under the sun.

This is election is a crux; a GO/NO GO for the Country.

I don't care if it's Carson, Trump or Cruz, or what combination; I don't care if it's some other non-establishment repub.

It just better not be a democrat.

[MtnGoat]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

I'd like to see Ted or Trump as president, Dr. Ben as VP. That would give Dr. Ben the experience he needs and then he'll be the first Black president of this country.......

I'm with you too TS ^^^^

Dr. Carson gave a great explanations tho.

[Richard]

To date, 16 pages of mostly 'open mouth-insert foot' fact-checking to aide in choosing a candidate to go with in 2016.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...united-states/

There'll be much more before this is over.

Gutes lesen.

Richard

[craigepo]

I think Carson is a very nice guy, and I will vote for anyone the republicans nominate. I think he would be the guy that I would most like to eat dinner with.

But, I can find 50 guys in a 100-mile radius from where I live that would be a more effective president. Helluva lot of difference between surgery and being the chief executive officer of the United States.

[craigepo]

Uh-oh. He might be sunk.

http://www.erickontheradio.com/2015/...4938-265749345

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by craigepo

But, I can find 50 guys in a 100-mile radius from where I live that would be a more effective president.

Sure, but they're not leading in the polls with less than a year left.

No direct reflection on you, Craigepo, but "beggars cain't be choicy."

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by craigepo

Uh-oh. He might be sunk.

http://www.erickontheradio.com/2015/...4938-265749345

At this point, what difference does it make?

[PSM]

Originally Posted by craigepo

Uh-oh. He might be sunk.

http://www.erickontheradio.com/2015/...4938-265749345

It's funny how the MSM use an electron microscope when looking into GOP candidates and look through the objective end of the Hale telescope when looking at Dems. Typical.

He never said that he went to WP.

Pat

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by PSM

It's funny how the MSM use an electron microscope when looking into GOP candidates and look through the objective end of the Hale telescope when looking at Dems. Typical.

He never said that he went to WP.

Pat

They're attacking him because they're scared of him, to state the obvious.

I ain't the only one still steamin' over Benghazi; I think the issue will raise it's head at a crucial point during the process.

I don't believe anybody who's carrying Carson on their shoulders right now gives a hoot about the West Point/schoolyard knifing anecdotes...

[Hand]

Originally Posted by akv

Zero, The economy, and Hillary's foibles have left the Dims as vulnerable as they have been in some time

Vulnerable in whose eyes?

They don't care about anything that Hillary has done, nor understand the consequences of what she hasn't done.

In the eyes of the democrats, the only answer to "who will be the next president" is either Sanders or Hillary. Younger voters prefer Sanders due to his socialists promises for more free stuff, elder voters prefer Hillary because they dislike Sanders socialist tendencies.

The same folks who bemoan voting for Obama's second term have not crossed the aisle, so to speak. They simply acknowledge that Obama was a bad choice, still, any dem is way better than any republican in their eyes.

Knowing this, it is hard for me to see any discussion on this topic as anything more than a discussion on which rep candidate is going to get the majority of minority of the votes.

I hope I'm wrong though.

[Storm]

Originally Posted by Hand

Vulnerable in whose eyes?

They don't care about anything that Hillary has done, nor understand the consequences of what she hasn't done.

In the eyes of the democrats, the only answer to "who will be the next president" is either Sanders or Hillary. Younger voters prefer Sanders due to his socialists promises for more free stuff, elder voters prefer Hillary because they dislike Sanders socialist tendencies.

The same folks who bemoan voting for Obama's second term have not crossed the aisle, so to speak. They simply acknowledge that Obama was a bad choice, still, any dem is way better than any republican in their eyes.

Knowing this, it is hard for me to see any discussion on this topic as anything more than a discussion on which rep candidate is going to get the majority of minority of the votes.

I hope I'm wrong though.

I almost totally agree with you here. The only people who care about Hillary and all of her incompetence and lies, are already voting Republican. The rest do not care, she could be caught doing any completely disgusting thing, and still receive their votes.

The only question is whether or not more Republican voters will get out and vote. Hopefully that will happen.

[Sohei]

Originally Posted by Storm

I almost totally agree with you here. The only people who care about Hillary and all of her incompetence and lies, are already voting Republican. The rest do not care, she could be caught doing any completely disgusting thing, and still receive their votes.

The only question is whether or not more Republican voters will get out and vote. Hopefully that will happen.

She has a cult following that will vote for her no matter what comes up. She is in their "Voter DNA." They can't do anything about it...they feel "compelled" to vote for her. Numbers don't matter...facts don't matter...she WILL get their votes.

[akv]

Originally Posted by Hand

Vulnerable in whose eyes?

Vulnerable in the sense despite 7 years of the FED printing free money, the economy still sucks, ISIS is as dangerous and better funded than AQ ever was, and the Dims leading candidate Hillary has some serious hair on her, and as you said people acknowledge Obama was a poor choice.

IMHO the undecided people would be less likely to vote for change if the economy was booming like when Clinton ran for his second term.

I've been told the same national malaise you infer was present under Carter in the late 70's, and that led to Reagan.

[PSM]

Originally Posted by craigepo

Uh-oh. He might be sunk.

http://www.erickontheradio.com/2015/...4938-265749345

The response from the Carson Camp:

Here is the full statement Watts provided to TheDCNF:

“Dr Carson was the top ROTC student in the City of Detroit. In that role he was invited to meet General Westmoreland. He believes it was at a banquet. He can’t remember with specificity their brief conversation but it centered around Dr. Carson’s performance as ROTC City Executive Officer.

He was introduced to folks from West Point by his ROTC Supervisors. They told him they could help him get an appointment based on his grades and performance in ROTC. He considered it but in the end did not seek admission.

There are “Service Connected” nominations for stellar High School ROTC appointments. Again he was the top ROTC student in Detroit. I would argue strongly that an Appointment is indeed an amazing full scholarship. Having ran several Congressional Offices I am very familiar with the Nomination process.

Again though his Senior Commander was in touch with West Point and told Dr. Carson he could get in, Dr Carson did not seek admission.

The Politico story is an outright Lie. Dr. Carson as the leading ROTC student in Detroit was told by his Commanders that he could get an Appointment to the Academy. He never said he was admitted or even applied.

The campaign never 'admitted to anything'

This is what we have come to expect from Politico.”


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/06/te...#ixzz3qk5A7kiI

I'm thinking it's past time to start doing background checks on "journalists". I could have started with one CBS female who was my neighbor in Hollywood. I almost did when she went after Palin a few years ago, but she's off the air now.

Pat