half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26880 Mar 13, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
Who did you want to see get the nomination in 2008?
I didn't have a favorite. All of them were somewhat unremarkable. But McCain was definitely my least favorite.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#26881 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Everybody is entitled to their opinion. Mine is that McCain was doomed from the beginning. In desperation, he picked Palin for his running mate. She was on the same playing field as DumBama. She spoke good, she was good looking, a family woman, and she was much more appealing to conservatives than McCain could ever be just like DumBama was appealing to the left of the leftists.
It's also my opinion that McCain would have lost no matter who he chose as his running mate. Palin was his best bet at the time.
How dumb can you get, really?
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#26885 Mar 13, 2014
half-breed wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't have a favorite. All of them were somewhat unremarkable. But McCain was definitely my least favorite.
half-breed wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't have a favorite. All of them were somewhat unremarkable. But McCain was definitely my least favorite.
You are obviously a tough guy to please, because you had a wide choice of potential Republican candidates in 2008. My favorite was probably Tommy Thompson. Definitely smart and experienced (his welfare reforms served as a models for later efforts.) But not telegenic enough. And probably not conservative enough for voters like you.

My least favorite was Fred Thompson. He turned out to be a pretty empty-headed actor, who looked and sounded WONDERFUL as a candidate. Until he had to respond to unscripted questions...
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26886 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
Crossovers.

If it's one thing I would like to see the GOP do, it's to institute registration limits.
In 2004, it boiled down to Hillarious and DumBama. Six of one and a half-dozen of the other. It really didn't matter who got the nomination. So Democrats crossed over and registered themselves as Republicans so they could vote in our primary. They nominated the most liberal Republican running. Same thing last election.

What I would like to see is a restriction at least one year before the primaries. If you want to switch to the Republican party, fine, but you must do it a year before the first primary vote or after the primaries are over with. This would weed out potential crossovers. I would also like to see the Republican primary held on one day just like the general election.
There are too many loopholes to cheat in elections as I was discussing with Old Guy. I want to see the most honest elections possible.
I thought it was the cross-overs, too, but then I heard last night that Chris Christy is the one who's considered the best to run against Hillary, according to polls. It was being talked about on Fox News. I don't know who was polled, but there was a line-up of potential republican candidates (about 12 of them), and Christy was favored. I don't know what the hell's wrong with people. CHRISTY??? Good friggin grief. If people hadn't figured him out by the time Hurricane Sandy came around, his responses to Obama and Romney then, should have blown his cover big-time. But, he was still invited to speak at CPAC a week or so ago. He shouldn't have been let anywhere near that convention. I'm starting to think the conservative movement has been infiltrated by the republican establishment posing as conservatives.
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#26887 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Crossovers.
If it's one thing I would like to see the GOP do, it's to institute registration limits.
In 2004, it boiled down to Hillarious and DumBama. Six of one and a half-dozen of the other. It really didn't matter who got the nomination. So Democrats crossed over and registered themselves as Republicans so they could vote in our primary. They nominated the most liberal Republican running. Same thing last election.
You honestly believe that Democrats didn't have a very intense competition in their own primaries that election cycle? Do you really not remember the recent past?

There was someone trying to rig the primary system that year, but it wasn't the Democrats:

"In late February 2008, Limbaugh announced "Operation Chaos," a political call to action with the initial plan to have voters of the Republican Party temporarily cross over to vote in the Democratic primary and vote for Hillary Clinton, who at the time was in the midst of losing eleven straight primary contests to Barack Obama. Limbaugh has also cited the open primary process in the early primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina, which allowed independent voters to cross over into the Republican primaries to choose John McCain over more conservative candidates (such as Fred Thompson), as an inspiration.

At the point in which Limbaugh announced his gambit, Obama had seemed on the verge of clinching the Democratic nomination. However, Clinton subsequently won the Ohio primary and the Texas primary (while losing the Texas caucus and the overall delegate split) with large pluralities from rural counties; thus reemerging as a competitive opponent in the race."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rush_Limbaug...
Canton

Canton, OH

#26888 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I keep most all the stories I read. I have them divided into 30 folders. This way when I need something, it's right at my fingertips and I don't have to go Googling for it. From my factscheck folder:
Past Conspiracy Theories
Remember the swirl of stories around Diebold Election Systems and its CEO, Walden O’Dell, in 2004? O’Dell was an Ohio resident who held a fundraiser at his home for President Bush and wrote a fundraising letter promising to help “Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.” Some took him too literally, claiming that Bush “stole” Ohio’s electoral votes and the 2004 election.
But even the liberal New York Times editorial board waved off that conspiracy theory as nonsense. There were some glitches, as expected, with the machines on Election Day, but, as the Times wrote, there was “no evidence of vote theft or errors on a large scale.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/11/does-tagg-ro...
New York Times editorial, Nov. 14, 2004: It’s important to make it clear that there is no evidence such a thing happened.
That is a link to something about Tagg Romney owning the voting machines, which is a claim I never made.
Canton

Canton, OH

#26890 Mar 13, 2014
The state of California ordered that 15,000 of its Diebold voting machines not be used in the 2004 elections due to flaws that the company failed to disclose
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26891 Mar 13, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
You are obviously a tough guy to please, because you had a wide choice of potential Republican candidates in 2008. My favorite was probably Tommy Thompson. Definitely smart and experienced (his welfare reforms served as a models for later efforts.) But not telegenic enough. And probably not conservative enough for voters like you.
My least favorite was Fred Thompson. He turned out to be a pretty empty-headed actor, who looked and sounded WONDERFUL as a candidate. Until he had to respond to unscripted questions...
By the time the Ohio primary came around, I think the only candidates left were McCain, Huckabee, and Paul. I'm not a big fan of any of the three. Regardless, though, I still voted for McCain in the general election. I felt he was the lesser of the two evils, when compared to Obama.
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26894 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
I see. So what you're trying to tell me is that Limbaugh rigged the election and got the most liberal of liberals as the nominee, and Democrats had nothing to do with our primary and we got the most liberal Republicans we had running.
That makes sense.
I remember "operation chaos". I think the purpose was to get revenge on the democrats for crossing over and nominating McCain as our candidate.(It was too late to change the outcome of our primary.) So, Limbaugh encouraged republicans to try to get Hillary nominated.

It's a really bad idea for states to allow cross-overs, no matter what side of the aisle a person is on. I agree with you, that voters should have to be registered under a certain party affiliation for at least a year before voting in a primary.
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26895 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
Although I doubt it, Romney or Christie may conduct themselves in a total conservative way once out of the clutches of their blue states. Who knows? I don't have a crystal ball either.
One thing's for certain, I would vote for Christy before I voted for Hillary. At least with Christy, there's a 50% chance he'll do something conservative. And even if he does something not conservative, it probably won't be as damaging as what a liberal would do. Whoever the republican nominee is, I'll be on board to support him/her.

Until the primary is over though, I'd like to put my support behind some real conservatives, like Cruz and Lee. I like Jindhal, too. Trey Gowdy is an rising star in the party -- tough and outspoken. I haven't heard anything about the possibility of him running, though.
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26896 Mar 13, 2014
Dinesh D'souza's first movie, 2016, was excellent. He and producer Gerald R. Molen, have another one coming out on July 4 called "America".

https://www.youtube.com/watch...

"The movie, America, is a celebration of the uniqueness of America, and a powerful and moving rebuttal to America’s critics both at home and abroad. This film begins with a simple premise: What if America never existed? What if Columbus never landed in America because there was no America? In that case, Columbus would have kept going, and perhaps made it to his intended destination, India. How different history would have been if that occurred.

There is a crisis in America — an identity crisis. What does it mean to be an American? Is America moral or is America’s wealth a product of theft? We will also contrast the principles that built America, the spirit of 1776, with the ideas that are weakening America — the spirit of 1968. Which America do you want?"
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#26898 Mar 13, 2014
half-breed wrote:
<quoted text>
I remember "operation chaos". I think the purpose was to get revenge on the democrats for crossing over and nominating McCain as our candidate.
Rush was pretty clear that his goal was to extend the primaries, and force the Democrats to waste money at the primary level, so they wouldn't have it for the general election. And also weaken both Hillary and Obama in the process. He was certain that either candidate would lose to McCain.

But don't take my word for it. Cue up the Rush Limbaugh show from March 19, 2008:

"Yes, Operation Chaos is exceeding all objectives, ladies and gentlemen. This is just amazing."

"Obama is burning cash fighting Operation Chaos. Here's the latest poll numbers. "Barack Obama's big national lead over Hillary Clinton has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race, and both Democrats trail Republican John McCain, according a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.... "The poll showed Arizona Sen. McCain, who has clinched the Republican presidential nomination, is benefiting from the lengthy campaign battle between Obama and Clinton." Well, yes, which was the primary purpose of Operation Chaos.(laughing)

Folks, we are doing it! Do you realize, we are doing it! Things are happening out there on our terms. Why, this is just fabulous. "McCain leads 46 percent to 40 percent in a hypothetical matchup against Obama in the November presidential election, according to the poll. That is a sharp turnaround from the Reuters/Zogby poll from last month, which showed in a head-to-head matchup that Obama would beat McCain 47 percent to 40 percent.... Matched up against Clinton, McCain leads 48 percent to 40 percent, narrower than his 50 to 38 percent advantage over her in February.'It's not surprising to me that McCain's on top because there is disarray and confusion on the Democratic side,' Zogby said."

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/03/19/...
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#26900 Mar 13, 2014
half-breed wrote:
<quoted text>
Until the primary is over though, I'd like to put my support behind some real conservatives, like Cruz and Lee.
Let's say you get your wish, and one of them is actually your candidate. Doesn't that just mean you lose in the general election?

"The two highest-profile leaders of the GOP’s Defund Obamacare effort have taken a significant hit in the polls.

A new Gallup poll shows Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is viewed favorably by 26 percent of Americans, versus 36 percent who view him unfavorably.

In June, a less-well-known Cruz was still in positive territory, with a 24 percent favorable rating and an 18 percent unfavorable rating. In other words, his unfavorable rating has doubled, while his favorable rating has risen just two points.

Cruz’s top partner in the Defund Obamacare effort, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), has seen a similar drop — in his home state, at least. A new Brigham Young University poll shows Lee with a 40-51 favorable/unfavorable split, vs. a 50-41 split in June."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-poli...
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26901 Mar 13, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
Let's say you get your wish, and one of them is actually your candidate. Doesn't that just mean you lose in the general election?
We're losing anyway. It's time to take a chance on someone who actually believes in the republican platform (a.k.a. conservatism). The right-wing is what the republican party is actually supposed to be. The RHINOS need to go back across the aisle where they belong.
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26902 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
But these are the type of games I would like to see eliminated. Elections should not be a game. I take elections seriously because who we elect takes our country in their direction. I'm sick of hearing about Democrats bussing people to the polls, going to nursing homes to get votes of people that don't even know their spouses name, and dragging homeless people off of park benches and bribe them to vote.
If people want to register to vote, it's a very simple process. I'm against luring people who have no interest in voting to register. During the first DumBama election, one of our drivers exited the highway and was met by a group of black thugs in Cleveland. They were bothering people to register to vote for DumBama, and were offering M&M candies for signatures. Of course it was illegal, but nobody really pursued the matter. This crap needs to be stopped.
I agree with you about "Operation Chaos" ... it shouldn't have been done. I think Limbaugh learned his lesson, though, and he stayed neutral throughout the 2012 primary season. He mentioned good and bad things about all of the republican candidates, and didn't dog any of them. It made him a lot more effective in supporting Romney, when the general election season started.

It's a sad commentary on the part of the democrats, that they have to recruit young, uneducated, uninterested people to vote. But it's very telling, too ... they wouldn't win, if they couldn't get idiots to vote for them.
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#26903 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
Exactly. But people like Old Guy look for out of context quotes and know nothing more.
I notice you don't give any examples of how I took Rush's quotes out of context. And then you go on to paraphrase my comments.
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
But these are the type of games I would like to see eliminated.


Then you'll be glad to know that this is already illegal in Ohio. In fact, it's a felony. Too bad it's a toothless law.

"Operation Chaos," Rush Limbaugh's campaign urging Republicans to vote for Hillary Clinton in Democratic primaries, has been very effective. It doubled Republican turnout in Ohio and Texas, boosting Clinton and prolonging the Democratic race. But in Ohio, it was also almost certainly illegal.

Ohio law requires that citizens genuinely support a political party in order to vote in its primary. To change parties for a primary, a citizen must pledge, under the penalty of election falsification, that she is affiliated with the party and "supports" its principles. Lying on the pledge is a felony, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,500 fine. The law also stipulates that poll workers have a "duty" to challenge voters who are "not a member of the political party whose ballot the person desires to vote."

In Cuyahoga, Ohio's largest county, 16,000 Republicans switched parties for the primary last month. Several did so in bad faith, without truly changing parties, according to newspaper interviews and Internet postings. The Cuyahoga Board of Elections recently voted to investigate the matter; a report is expected on March 31. Despite the massive crossover voting, however, prosecutions are considered unlikely. A spokesperson for Ohio's Attorney General told Alternet that it is "very hard to prosecute" crossover voting cases, since the crime depends on proving a voter's motive on Election Day.

Limbaugh's motives, however, have been perfectly clear from the start. "I'm asking people to cross over, and if they can stomach it and I know it's a difficult thing to do, vote for Clinton," Limbaugh said before the Ohio primary. The goal, he explained, was to ensure Barack Obama was "bloodied up politically" and to extend the Democratic primary "soap opera."

Since the Ohio investigation began, Limbaugh has revved up his special brand of self-promotional damage control. He ran several segments defending "Operation Chaos" with the disingenuous argument that politicians also ask for crossover voters. Of course, intent makes all the difference: Reagan Democrats actually supported Reagan. Limbaugh's campaign is under legal scrutiny because he asked people to crossover in bad faith -- to tamper with elections."

http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php...
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26904 Mar 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
I would be a total Libertarian if not for their stance on narcotics and the military. However their small government platform is quite inviting; an issue the conservatives seemed to have abandoned.
Exactly my views about it. I liked Ron Paul, too, but his foreign policy ideas were messed up.
Rand Paul kind of fits what I'm looking for. When I watch debates and interviews, I look for somebody that wants to do the job of a president--not look to have the title of the president. I see that in Rand Paul just as I seen it with Newt Gingrich. I want somebody that exercises what he believes and not pander to the polls and party.
The less government in my life the better. And I'm willing to vote for anybody that represents my views. Less social programs and the elimination of bureaucracies (which I believe are the biggest threat to our liberty) get my attention.
Yes, the bureaucracies are a huge problem. If a conservative does win the presidency, and he goes after some of these tentacles of the federal govt, he's going to have the wrath of the left unleashed on him like we've never seen before. They depend on those to implement the bulk of their agenda.

I couldn't stand Gingrich. He was a conservative when he first started into politics, but then he sold out, IMO. I like Rand Paul, though, so far. I think I'm a little leery about him, because of his Dad's heavy libertarian streak. The world is getting too crazy to have someone in office who wants to blame America first, and turn his head to what's going on around us.

Concerning the social issues, those have been forced on us by the left. They have no respect for states rights, so they're pushing the gay agenda to the national level. And as far as their policy of infanticide goes, I can't think of any issue more important to deal with.
half-breed

Chillicothe, OH

#26905 Mar 13, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
Rush was pretty clear that his goal was to extend the primaries, and force the Democrats to waste money at the primary level, so they wouldn't have it for the general election. And also weaken both Hillary and Obama in the process. He was certain that either candidate would lose to McCain.
I wasn't listening to Limbaugh's program at that time, so I heard about "OC" in bits and pieces through the media. It sounded like a bad idea, whatever the motive.
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#26906 Mar 13, 2014
half-breed wrote:
We're losing anyway. It's time to take a chance on someone who actually believes in the republican platform (a.k.a. conservatism). The right-wing is what the republican party is actually supposed to be. The RHINOS need to go back across the aisle where they belong.
Where they will be welcomed by the Democrats! The Democratic Party will then become slightly more conservative, and proceed to win a lot more elections. Good plan.

The right wing has always been just a part of a larger Republican party. There have always been fiscal conservatives that were more liberal in their social views, but still identified as Republican.
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#26907 Mar 13, 2014
half-breed wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't listening to Limbaugh's program at that time, so I heard about "OC" in bits and pieces through the media. It sounded like a bad idea, whatever the motive.
I can't say that I'm a fan, but I've listened to Rush off and on since the very beginning.(He reminded me of Joe Pyne clone in his early days.) I listened to his show a lot around major elections. I was especially fascinated around the time that his hearing was failing, and he kept pretending on air that it was just some bizarre technical problem. His drug problems caught me by surprise.

It's hard to know what effect "Operation Chaos" really had. I agree that it was a bad idea.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Xenia Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
I hope that Huckabee will let the empire expire 2 hr The Hack Checker 1
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 17 hr Chuck 19,892
This is your oasis (Jun '08) 21 hr Dork of Hazard 3,171
Is the "CROSS" mightier than the "COLT"? 22 hr Gun Nut 1
How many Christian villains? 23 hr Leon Harrison 2
Oakwood Swimmer Brock Turner Mon Tantor 1
"The unmentioned pachyderm in the room" Sun Leon Harrison 2
More from around the web

Xenia People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]