PDA

View Full Version : 2016 election odds


lamboguy
11-18-2012, 11:57 AM
H. Clinton 6-1

M. Rubio 10-1

J. Bush 13-1

C. Christie 13-1

P. Ryan 12-1

FantasticDan
11-18-2012, 12:16 PM
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/421233/november-13-2012/2072--race-to-the-white-orb

01:50 :p :ThmbUp:

horses4courses
11-18-2012, 12:41 PM
See you in around 3 years.......... ;)

lamboguy
11-18-2012, 01:03 PM
See you in around 3 years.......... ;)we lost a few key guys on this board because they listened to polls instead of real lines on the last go.

this time around, everyone will be well aware of what is going on ahead of time.

Rookies
11-18-2012, 01:05 PM
H. Clinton 6-1

M. Rubio 10-1

J. Bush 13-1

C. Christie 13-1

P. Ryan 12-1

Hmmm... YOU are relentless!:D

On these picks, Hilary is four year older than me, making her a candidate at what? 68? Her above average peformance as SOS was fine, but she's not in the Top Tier of Superstars like Kissinger, Rusk and Baker.Her time was snatching defeat from the jaws of victory against Obama 4 years ago. :ThmbDown:

Rubio. At least odds on to win, especially if he gets the Republican Party on side with Illegal Immigration and he brings a critical large state into both play and victory. Young, intelligent, articulate, intelligent and with the requisite good family background.:ThmbUp:

Jeb. Hmmm.. the SMART son. ;) Coulda, shoulda, woulda... He'll be in his early 60s and is a moderate version, who is in favour of changing the landscape on Immigration, right? Down side is 3 Bushes and you're out. If there was no Rubio, would have shot... but there is. :ThmbDown:

Christie? :lol: Et tu Brute? Not a chance, although I find Christie refreshingly candid and open on almost any subject. :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

Von Ryan. I don't discount his smarts, but his extreme positions are too much for being voted Prezzie. Really, it depends on whether Obama + Congress get the economy turned around. If it is, Ryan has less of a shot.:ThmbDown:

Others

It's an odd inversion, really. The Dems have proven, with the Obama playbook, that they are the party of a winning coalition majority of women, minorities, young people and urbanites. Their problem is that, aside from the President, they have waaaaay too many fossils in critical positions ( Pelosi & Reid, being the 2 focal points). Their young stars are now apprenticing, aside from Cuomo, Van Hollen & Julian Castro. They appear out of star candidates in 2016.

As for the Republicans? They've already trashed the whacko end of the continuum losers & the incomparably stupid (Perry) in this year's Republican primary.

On the plus side, they've got plenty of upcoming young stars in addition to those mentioned above. I'd consider Govs. Daniels, Gin-Doll, Haley & Walker in the mix along with Ted Cruz.

All of these need to nuance any national message to contest the future dominated by the Democratic coalition of voters.

dartman51
11-18-2012, 01:24 PM
Hmmm... YOU are relentless!:D

On these picks, Hilary is four year older than me, making her a candidate at what? 68? Her above average peformance as SOS was fine, but she's not in the Top Tier of Superstars like Kissinger, Rusk and Baker.Her time was snatching defeat from the jaws of victory against Obama 4 years ago. :ThmbDown:

Rubio. At least odds on to win, especially if he gets the Republican Party on side with Illegal Immigration and he brings a critical large state into both play and victory. Young, intelligent, articulate, intelligent and with the requisite good family background.:ThmbUp:

Jeb. Hmmm.. the SMART son. ;) Coulda, shoulda, woulda... He'll be in his early 60s and is a moderate version, who is in favour of changing the landscape on Immigration, right? Down side is 3 Bushes and you're out. If there was no Rubio, would have shot... but there is. :ThmbDown:

Christie? :lol: Et tu Brute? Not a chance, although I find Christie refreshingly candid and open on almost any subject. :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

Von Ryan. I don't discount his smarts, but his extreme positions are too much for being voted Prezzie. Really, it depends on whether Obama + Congress get the economy turned around. If it is, Ryan has less of a shot.:ThmbDown:

Others

It's an odd inversion, really. The Dems have proven, with the Obama playbook, that they are the party of a winning coalition majority of women, minorities, young people and urbanites. Their problem is that, aside from the President, they have waaaaay too many fossils in critical positions ( Pelosi & Reid, being the 2 focal points). Their young stars are now apprenticing, aside from Cuomo, Van Hollen & Julian Castro. They appear out of star candidates in 2016.

As for the Republicans? They've already trashed the whacko end of the continuum losers & the incomparably stupid (Perry) in this year's Republican primary.

On the plus side, they've got plenty of upcoming young stars in addition to those mentioned above. I'd consider Govs. Daniels, Gin-Doll, Haley & Walker in the mix along with Ted Cruz.

All of these need to nuance any national message to contest the future dominated by the Democratic coalition of voters.

WOW!! Don't let this scare you off your analysis, but I agree with you 100%. :eek: That is a pretty damn good job of handicapping the field.:ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

lamboguy
11-18-2012, 01:39 PM
i only listed the top 5 contenders. as big of a favorite that Hillary is, the democrats don't have anyone in the top 10 after her. if she doesn't run the democrats are in big trouble. the next on the list is Cuomo and he is not that strong.

these bets are like futures bets in horses for the Kentucky Derby, if your horse doesn't start you lose. i warn you about that because you are getting 6-1 with Hillary which looks like a lock if she runs, but a lot can happen in 4 years.

hcap
11-18-2012, 02:24 PM
What about Sarah?

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-allen-palin-for-president-20121118,0,1525685.story

JustRalph
11-18-2012, 02:43 PM
Marco Rubio gave a speech in Iowa last night and set a fund raising record


"And they're off!"

horses4courses
11-18-2012, 03:28 PM
I did get a chuckle going down the list of possibles and their odds, though.
Ladbroke's of London win the irony prize for quoting Nate Silver @ 538-1 ;)

Rookies
11-18-2012, 03:59 PM
I did get a chuckle going down the list of possibles and their odds, though.
Ladbroke's of London win the irony prize for quoting Nate Silver @ 538-1 ;)

:lol:

Pretty good and way ahead of Rove at 538,000-1!:lol:

HUSKER55
11-18-2012, 05:00 PM
I take it you aren't even going to bet $2. :rolleyes: :D

Tom
11-18-2012, 05:07 PM
What are the odds we have a country left after 4 more years of continual failure?

HUSKER55
11-18-2012, 05:14 PM
they gave Rove some odds.....so I am guessing they think we will still be here. ok,...ok...not great odds but odds never the less :D

JustRalph
11-18-2012, 05:37 PM
What are the odds we have a country left after 4 more years of continual failure?

The country is bigger than Obama. We will survive. Hunker down is my motto

lsbets
11-18-2012, 06:49 PM
Wasn't Hillary the big favorite to get the Dem nomination in 2006?

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, especially because I think Rush said something along these lines, but has anyone seen Hillary on an HDTV? She looks like crap. Age has not been kind to her. Maybe she's just worn out and a couple of years off will do her good, but appearance does matter to enough voters that it makes a difference. I don't think people will vote for a big fat guy like Christie, and I don't think people will vote for a woman who looks really, really bad like she does now.

For the Dems, I think Cuomo would make a good candidate, for the Reps, Rubio or one of the governors. I don't know who would be in the Dem field right now, but I would make Cuomo the favorite if he runs.

johnhannibalsmith
11-18-2012, 08:23 PM
Wasn't Hillary the big favorite to get the Dem nomination in 2006?

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, especially because I think Rush said something along these lines, but has anyone seen Hillary on an HDTV? She looks like crap. Age has not been kind to her. Maybe she's just worn out and a couple of years off will do her good, but appearance does matter to enough voters that it makes a difference. I don't think people will vote for a big fat guy like Christie, and I don't think people will vote for a woman who looks really, really bad like she does now.

For the Dems, I think Cuomo would make a good candidate, for the Reps, Rubio or one of the governors. I don't know who would be in the Dem field right now, but I would make Cuomo the favorite if he runs.

You won't get flamed for me on Hillary. I've been consistently on record in my belief that she's all done. At this age, through all the shit she's been through, and as nasty as this last campaign was - I just can't see her caring enough about what has become a pretty miserable job to put up with commercials about her husband and blowjobs, Gennifer Flowers, Benghazi, Whitewater, the possibility of Egypt becoming a mess, and having to be the fall guy for what will probably be a mess of an economy and healthcare system, the latter of which she doesn't even really support.

I suspect she'd like to just fade away from what politics has become lately and let the Clinton name go down in the annals of history with a mostly positive connotation and not even risk being in the crosshairs of what the next decade brings.

PaceAdvantage
11-18-2012, 08:26 PM
My guess is the results of this election will embolden the Democratic party to put up a true left-wing candidate next time around. Not this half-ass Obama "let's keep lots of what Bush did intact" garbage.

That would be a positive for the Republican party. The Dems actually thinking they have some sort of mandate for their particular brand of nonsense.

hcap
11-18-2012, 08:43 PM
My guess is the results of this election will embolden the Democratic party to put up a true left-wing candidate next time around. Not this half-ass Obama "let's keep lots of what Bush did intact" garbage.

That would be a positive for the Republican party. The Dems actually thinking they have some sort of mandate for their particular brand of nonsense.At this point the Dems have more of a mandate than your wonderfully out of touch Tea Party. (TP 'ers thought they had a mandate)

Besides you can't assume there will be a Republican party.

elysiantraveller
11-18-2012, 08:55 PM
Rand Paul or whoever he and his movement put up.

PaceAdvantage
11-18-2012, 09:00 PM
Besides you can't assume there will be a Republican party.Thank you for providing my theory with actual, tangible, early proof of its validity... :lol:

hcap
11-18-2012, 09:03 PM
Thank you for providing my theory with actual, tangible, early proof of its validity... :lol:Just thought I would give you some anti-left ammo . Of course I'm joking........it might take 2 or 3 election cycles before we have the Herman Cain 999 Party instead :lol: :lol:

Stillriledup
11-18-2012, 09:21 PM
Rubio for the limit. I'll be bumping this 4 years from now to rub salt.... :D

rastajenk
11-19-2012, 06:04 AM
I suspect she'd like to just fade away from what politics has become lately and let the Clinton name go down in the annals of history with a mostly positive connotation and not even risk being in the crosshairs of what the next decade brings.That's not the Clintons I know. She may not make a run for the top job, but I don't think they are going to fade away.

Tom
11-19-2012, 09:36 AM
That's not the Clintons I know. She may not make a run for the top job, but I don't think they are going to fade away.

Like roaches, you think you got them all, then, one night, you turn on the kitchen light........Ba-zing!

johnhannibalsmith
11-19-2012, 09:47 AM
That's not the Clintons I know. She may not make a run for the top job, but I don't think they are going to fade away.

Your probably right... they just seem like the type to be consumed with the "legacy"... and I just can't see it getting any better by sticking around for the immediate political future.

Tom
11-19-2012, 09:51 AM
I thing they live and breath power.
She will run.

Robert Goren
11-20-2012, 02:33 PM
Although there are exceptions, the republicans tend to nominate governors or former governors. Picking from the list of republican governors at this time is risking to say the least. Thing at the state level can change over night. One day Charly Crist was a darling of the party, then the next no republican would even mention his name. Thing happen. My best guess is the current VP will elect president in 2016 ala Bush41 after Reagan. Remember too Gore won the election with popular vote, but at the Supreme Court decide against him in Florida. He actually carried Florida when they actually finished recounting vote after Bush was already in office.

PaceAdvantage
11-20-2012, 05:18 PM
He actually carried Florida when they actually finished recounting vote after Bush was already in office.No he didn't. In fact, just the opposite was concluded. Although, in the end, it seems nobody really knows.

I offer you this...the media consortium recount:

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/

According to a massive months-long study commissioned by eight news organizations in 2001, George W. Bush probably still would have won even if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a limited statewide recount to go forward as ordered by Florida’s highest court.

Bush also probably would have won had the state conducted the limited recount of only four heavily Democratic counties that Al Gore asked for, the study found.

On the other hand, the study also found that Gore probably would have won, by a range of 42 to 171 votes out of 6 million cast, had there been a broad recount of all disputed ballots statewide. However, Gore never asked for such a recount. The Florida Supreme Court ordered only a recount of so-called "undervotes," about 62,000 ballots where voting machines didn’t detect any vote for a presidential candidate.

None of these findings are certain.

Saratoga_Mike
11-20-2012, 05:40 PM
Pesky facts escaping Goren once again.

Robert Goren
11-20-2012, 05:43 PM
No he didn't. In fact, just the opposite was concluded. Although, in the end, it seems nobody really knows.

I offer you this...the media consortium recount:

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/ There were several people doing counting. The people I trust say Gore actually won. There is one thing for sure, The republicans who were running the state in 2000 screwed up the election big time. They didn't do much job this time only this time Florida doesn't matter. Thank God.

Saratoga_Mike
11-20-2012, 05:43 PM
There were several people doing counting. The people I trust say Gore actually won. There is one thing for sure, The republicans who were running the state in 2000 screwed up the election big time. They didn't do much job this time only this time Florida doesn't matter. Thank God.

Please elaborate.

PaceAdvantage
11-20-2012, 05:49 PM
There were several people doing counting. The people I trust say Gore actually won.Good to know you now don't trust these organizations:

The study cost nearly $1 million and was the most thorough and comprehensive news-media review of the Florida balloting. It was sponsored by the Associated Press, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, CNN, St. Petersburg Times, Palm Beach Post, Washington Post and the Tribune Co., which owns papers including the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Orlando Sentinel and Baltimore Sun. The news organizations hired the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago to look at each untallied ballot. Trained investigators examined 175,010 ballots provided by local election officials. The media consortium then analyzed the raw data produced by NORC and drew conclusions. The result, released Nov. 11, 2001, was something of a muddle. Many if not most of those names highlighted above are darlings of the left, are they not? Including the University Of Chicago.

The way you're acting, one would think Fox News and Oral Roberts University were behind this study.... :lol: :bang:

Robert Goren
11-20-2012, 08:11 PM
Please elaborate. Have they figured out who won 2012 yet? If so who, may I ask. Whenever I turned the news lately, it was first wall to wall coverage of a couple of generals's affairs and now Humas and Israel trading rocket fire. I want NYRA news again:rolleyes:

Robert Goren
11-20-2012, 08:19 PM
Good to know you now don't trust these organizations:

Many if not most of those names highlighted above are darlings of the left, are they not? Including the University Of Chicago.

The way you're acting, one would think Fox News and Oral Roberts University were behind this study.... :lol: :bang: Even the first article you quoted from factcheck.org agreed with and quoted Frank Cerabino
"Like sorting grains of sand on a windy day, getting a definitive recount of Florida’s votes in last year’s presidential election has turned out to be an exercise in frustration.

In a statewide election decided by hundreds, maybe only dozens, of votes, the limitations of the voting machinery – compounded with sometimes sloppy custody of the ballots and the slight but measurable biases of allegedly neutral human tabulators – make getting precise vote totals virtually impossible."

PaceAdvantage
11-20-2012, 08:48 PM
Even the first article you quoted from factcheck.org agreed with and quoted Frank Cerabino
"Like sorting grains of sand on a windy day, getting a definitive recount of Florida’s votes in last year’s presidential election has turned out to be an exercise in frustration.

In a statewide election decided by hundreds, maybe only dozens, of votes, the limitations of the voting machinery – compounded with sometimes sloppy custody of the ballots and the slight but measurable biases of allegedly neutral human tabulators – make getting precise vote totals virtually impossible."Which is EXACTLY why I responded to your inaccurate statement in the first place!

Need I remind you what you typed?

He actually carried Florida when they actually finished recounting vote after Bush was already in office. :bang:

lamboguy
11-28-2012, 11:06 AM
H. Clinton 6-1

M. Rubio 10-1

J. Bush 13-1

C. Christie 13-1

P. Ryan 12-1notable changes


H. Clinton now 4-1

C. Christie now 11-1

P. Ryan now 15-1

redshift1
11-28-2012, 02:21 PM
Christie is my early favorite.

Ryan seems unlikely.

dartman51
11-28-2012, 04:54 PM
Christie is my early favorite.

Ryan seems unlikely.


Christie's job approval rating is at 72%, in the latest poll. :ThmbUp:

lamboguy
11-28-2012, 05:40 PM
Christie's job approval rating is at 72%, in the latest poll. :ThmbUp:
he was as impressive as it gets with that hurricane that hit his state.

lamboguy
12-09-2012, 08:28 PM
no major changes this week except for Christie now 11-1

BlueShoe
12-10-2012, 12:45 PM
What are the odds we have a country left after 4 more years of continual failure?
Also my concern. Will we still exist as a republic in 2016 and will there actually be an election that year? A national calamity or crisis with elections postponed or canceled? Obama remains in power or even declares himself President-For-Life? Widespread civil uprisings or even a Right vs. Left civil war? Country laid waste by nuclear strikes from a rogue nation or even China or Russia? A depression so severe that in desperation the government is permitted to become a virtual dictatorship with controls and powers resembling that of the old Soviet Union? Not science fiction, any of the above scenarios while not likely, are not impossible either. Right now, better hope to hell we are still intact in 2016 and have an election, or for that matter, even in 2014.

horses4courses
12-10-2012, 01:15 PM
Yeah, with some it's never a question of whether the glass is half full, or empty.
They just look at the glass as having been made in some half-assed, third world country, so it's going to shatter pretty soon anyway,
and the water will be flowing all over the place....... :rolleyes:

Tom
12-10-2012, 01:45 PM
Do we make any glasses in this country anymore?

Valuist
12-10-2012, 02:06 PM
I would book the Clinton money. She had her chance in 2008 and couldn't get out of the primary. And when this administration runs the economy into the ground, it won't bode well for one connected to it.

lamboguy
12-10-2012, 03:07 PM
I would book the Clinton money. She had her chance in 2008 and couldn't get out of the primary. And when this administration runs the economy into the ground, it won't bode well for one connected to it.you can go right on betfair and lay 5-1 and against Clinton for as much as your heart desires.

Robert Goren
12-10-2012, 03:30 PM
Age is catching up Clinton. I think Biden will the democratic nominee. The GOP nominee? Who knows? If you told me or almost anyone in 2008 right after the election that Romney would be the GOP nominee, we all would have had good laugh. 4 years is along time in politics. This I am pretty sure of. It will be a senator or governor or a VP (or nominee) or a former one of those. House members almost never nominated. The thing about picking a sitting governor at this stage is that things can go bad in his state over night. That said, Christie is the early favorite, but he has no place to go but down.

Actor
12-10-2012, 04:04 PM
Age is catching up Clinton. I think Biden will the democratic nominee.Biden is 70. Hillary is 65. They will be 74 and 69 in 2016. Biden would be the oldest president ever. Hillary would be the second oldest.

I saw Hillary during her '08 campaign. Got this photo. Unfortunately the autofocus latched onto the signs in front, so her image is slightly out of focus. She looked older in person than she did on TV. Still a beauty IMHO.

http://my.oh.voyager.net/~actor/TheCandidateresized.JPG

rastajenk
12-11-2012, 06:15 AM
You won't get flamed for me on Hillary. I've been consistently on record in my belief that she's all done.
The Newt disagrees with you. (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/12/10/newt-lets-face-it-hillarys-going-to-be-awfully-tough-to-beat-in-2016/)

“She’s a very competent person. She’s married to the most popular Democrat in the country; they both think [it] would be good for her to be president. It makes it virtually impossible to stop her for the nomination.”

barn32
12-11-2012, 06:54 AM
we lost a few key guys on this board because they listened to polls instead of real lines on the last go.

Key guys? More like a couple of nut jobs if you ask me.

Robert Goren
12-11-2012, 09:33 AM
Biden is 70. Hillary is 65. They will be 74 and 69 in 2016. Biden would be the oldest president ever. Hillary would be the second oldest.

I saw Hillary during her '08 campaign. Got this photo. Unfortunately the autofocus latched onto the signs in front, so her image is slightly out of focus. She looked older in person than she did on TV. Still a beauty IMHO.
I didn't realise Biden is that old. I still think he gets Democratic nod by default. I just don't Hillary will run. 2008 was her year. The most interesting relatively unknown person in GOP is right now is the S.C. governor.

JustRalph
12-11-2012, 09:38 AM
I didn't realise Biden is that old. I still think he gets Democratic nod by default. I just don't Hillary will run. 2008 was her year. The most interesting relatively unknown person in GOP is right now is the S.C. governor.

No way he ever makes it out of the primary season

He couldn't get it done before and he looks like more of a bonehead now

BlueShoe
12-11-2012, 11:43 AM
Age is catching up Clinton. I think Biden will the democratic nominee.
Old Joe? I would be absolutely delighted if this buffoon would be the nominee. So delighted in fact, that I might even make a contribution to his campaign were he to enter the primaries.:rolleyes:

PaceAdvantage
12-11-2012, 08:10 PM
Key guys? More like a couple of nut jobs if you ask me.Nobody asked you.

austin
12-11-2012, 11:58 PM
Nobody asked you.

I did
The circus left town but the republicant's didn't take
their New York clowns with them.
No not a demo that's the fun about you republicant's
you keep bringing the same old nut cases to the show
every 4 years.
Here's a idea for you vote for Gary Johnson next time
same bang for your buck but at least you didn't vote
for a CROOK.
But knowing clowns you might even vote for Mitster
again.

PaceAdvantage
12-12-2012, 12:05 AM
Mitt Romney's a crook? How so genius? How did that fact get by the good DEMOCRATS of Massachusetts?

Or did you forget that happened.

Good enough for TRUE BLUE Massachusetts, but not good enough for the rest of the country...how odd...guess then what the REPUBLICANTs say about Teddy Kennedy was right on the money all along...and Barney Frank...

Come to think of it, you're right. Massachusetts sucks when it comes to their political judgement....(not to mention their baseball team)

austin
12-12-2012, 12:21 AM
Mitt Romney's a crook? How so genius? How did that fact get by the good DEMOCRATS of Massachusetts?

Or did you forget that happened.

Good enough for TRUE BLUE Massachusetts, but not good enough for the rest of the country...how odd...guess then what the REPUBLICANTs say about Teddy Kennedy was right on the money all along...and Barney Frank...

Come to think of it, you're right. Massachusetts sucks when it comes to their political judgement....(not to mention their baseball team)


Sorry don't live in Mass.
So you didn't understand the post you must have been listening to RUSH BLA
BLA the post said I'm not a demo get it.

PaceAdvantage
12-12-2012, 12:33 AM
Sorry don't live in Mass.
So you didn't understand the post you must have been listening to RUSH BLA
BLA the post said I'm not a demo get it.Learn to write ENGLISH.

I DON'T LISTEN TO RUSH. STOP ACTING LIKE A ROBOT AND SPOUTING OFF ROBOTIC RESPONSES.

And I never said you were a DEMO, whatever that means. Read MY post again.

austin
12-12-2012, 12:50 AM
Learn to write ENGLISH.

I DON'T LISTEN TO RUSH. STOP ACTING LIKE A ROBOT AND SPOUTING OFF ROBOTIC RESPONSES.

And I never said you were a DEMO, whatever that means. Read MY post again.

Are you drinking again.
Thanks for being an english checker.
And did I post this in the right section.
How about Bill'O'Liar you that guy.
You might be a good handicapper but you don't
know shit about your own party of CROOKS.
Hows my ENGLISH

PaceAdvantage
12-12-2012, 12:56 AM
Are you drinking again.
Thanks for being an english checker.
And did I post this in the right section.
How about Bill'O'Liar you that guy.
You might be a good handicapper but you don't
know shit about your own party of CROOKS.
Hows my ENGLISHHow is Mitt Romney a crook? Try and follow along.

And thanks for agreeing with me that I didn't call you a DEMO (whatever that means).

Your English ain't so hot...

austin
12-12-2012, 01:20 AM
How is Mitt Romney a crook? Try and follow along.

And thanks for agreeing with me that I didn't call you a DEMO (whatever that means).

Your English ain't so hot...

Don't worry Pace the circus will be back in town in 2016
Lets just see what loser you back then.
It's funny that you hate someone so bad that you would vote
for someone you hate more.
But thanks for the english lesson but remember it's
Your English ain't so hot...
It's your English isn't so hot.

Have a nice day @ the track

PaceAdvantage
12-12-2012, 09:40 AM
Don't worry Pace the circus will be back in town in 2016
Lets just see what loser you back then.
It's funny that you hate someone so bad that you would vote
for someone you hate more.
But thanks for the english lesson but remember it's
Your English ain't so hot...
It's your English isn't so hot.

Have a nice day @ the trackI'm glad you were able to catch that...I did it just for you in order to make my words more understandable to you.

So, seeing as you are capable of evolving, how about telling me exactly why Romney is a crook. Defend your notion.

Why are guys like you always so boring and predictable?

Valuist
12-12-2012, 09:51 AM
Don't worry Pace the circus will be back in town in 2016
Lets just see what loser you back then.
It's funny that you hate someone so bad that you would vote
for someone you hate more.
But thanks for the english lesson but remember it's
Your English ain't so hot...
It's your English isn't so hot.

Have a nice day @ the track

Nice punctuation. Or shall I say Nice Punctuation?

austin
12-12-2012, 11:44 PM
I'm glad you were able to catch that...I did it just for you in order to make my words more understandable to you.

So, seeing as you are capable of evolving, how about telling me exactly why Romney is a crook. Defend your notion.

Why are guys like you always so boring and predictable?

See your ass on Fox in 2016 with a Sarah sign
good luck

PaceAdvantage
12-13-2012, 12:44 AM
See your ass on Fox in 2016 with a Sarah sign
good luckFox...Sarah...you're hitting all the key words...good for you!

austin
12-13-2012, 01:55 AM
Fox...Sarah...you're hitting all the key words...good for you!

Whine,Whine you lost that's why they call it POLITIKOS system
Woops that's greek .
Just get over it.
Lets do this you can't pick shit in the POLITIKOS system
want to try your luck at racing.
You pick AQU or GP on FRIDAY and I pick BFHP or GG or better
yet pick what you want to play at any track.
If you lose just shut the F__K up
GAME ON DUDE you can get your little bitches to help you out.
Blowhards like you make me sick.
PUT UP OR SHUT UP END OF STORY

PaceAdvantage
12-14-2012, 12:45 AM
Blowhards like you make me sick.Good. Now I have absolutely no incentive to stop...

thaskalos
12-14-2012, 03:51 AM
Well PA...you can't call him a retread...

He seems 100% original...:)

Valuist
12-15-2012, 02:56 PM
I would book the Clinton money. She had her chance in 2008 and couldn't get out of the primary. And when this administration runs the economy into the ground, it won't bode well for one connected to it.

Looks like I will be proven right and the linemaker wrong. She will be too old in 2016 and already is having health issues:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CLINTON?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-12-15-12-28-49

rastajenk
12-15-2012, 03:04 PM
Why, she'll be back up and running good as new, :rolleyes: as soon as the Bengazi thing gets swept down the memory hole.

lamboguy
12-16-2012, 07:53 PM
line update: Clinton now +350 was +400, Rubio now +700 was +1100

johnhannibalsmith
12-16-2012, 07:54 PM
line update: Clinton now +350 was +400, Rubio now +700 was +1100

Gawd I hope the Mayans are onto something.

lamboguy
01-14-2013, 01:45 AM
odds changes:

Clinton now +$400 was +$350

Christie now +$1400 was +$1100

these are all meaningless numbers right now, there is not that much betting conviction right now behind these numbers

fast4522
01-14-2013, 06:06 AM
odds changes:

Clinton now +$400 was +$350

Christie now +$1400 was +$1100

these are all meaningless numbers right now, there is not that much betting conviction right now behind these numbers

Because neither one will be there 2016.

Mike at A+
01-14-2013, 10:14 AM
Republicans will not win a presidential election in our lifetimes as long as:
1.) Democrats make it easy for people to collect a government check for sitting on their asses.
2.) Democrat voters of a a few particular demographics keep banging out babies out of wedlock.
3.) Democrat politicians keep getting away with playing the race card, the gender card, the class card, etc.
4.) Democrat politicians allow unions to get away with all sorts of nonsense at taxpayer expense in return for votes.

Does anyone in the lower class give a rat's ass about the national debt? Nope!
Does anyone in the lower class care about unemployment? Nope.
Does anyone in the lower class care about diminishing well paying jobs for which they will never qualify? Nope.

In short, this is basically the end of America. Anyone with any serious money who is NOT in some way protected by a Democrat administration that publicly demonizes the rich but privately winks at their rich supporters would have to be crazy to continue living here (and that includes older upper middle class people). The blatant arrogance of this president and his enablers has set the stage for a mass exodus of wealth and jobs that will not return in our lifetimes. It's sad how the worthless non-producers of this country have voted for its demise in return for the crumbs they are thrown.

hcap
01-14-2013, 11:58 AM
Tells us how you really feel MIKE..I will mention one item that you have not considered.............ring..............ring..... .......Damn, gotta run my ObamaPhone is ringing :) :)

Mike at A+
01-14-2013, 12:16 PM
Tells us how you really feel MIKE..I will mention one item that you have not considered.............ring..............ring..... .......Damn, gotta run my ObamaPhone is ringing :) :)
Your failure to address ANY of the points I just made proves their validity. Like a true liberal, you are whistling past the graveyard.

Tom
01-14-2013, 12:19 PM
Your failure to address ANY of the points I just made proves their validity. Like a true liberal, you are whistling past the graveyard.

He can't address them.....his emails don't tell him how. :lol:

horses4courses
01-14-2013, 12:42 PM
When I'm across the pond next, I'll take a trip into a bookie shop in Dublin and throw a few euros on the 2016 contest.
Will scan copies of the tickets on here.

No value on Hillary at 9-2...besides, I think she'll wind up on the Supreme Court.
Hmmm....I'm thinking some 25-1 on Joe Biden and, just for kicks, a little flyer at 150-1 on Michelle Obama.

Shame there are no odds quoted on Harry Reid, or Nancy Pelosi.
Talk about a red rag to a bull........ :lol:

Mike at A+
01-14-2013, 01:13 PM
When I'm across the pond next, I'll take a trip into a bookie shop in Dublin and throw a few euros on the 2016 contest.
Will scan copies of the tickets on here.

No value on Hillary at 9-2...besides, I think she'll wind up on the Supreme Court.
Hmmm....I'm thinking some 25-1 on Joe Biden and, just for kicks, a little flyer at 150-1 on Michelle Obama.

Shame there are no odds quoted on Harry Reid, or Nancy Pelosi.
Talk about a red rag to a bull........ :lol:
150/1 on Moochelle is an OVERLAY. As I've said before, Dems could keep running blacks and always get 95% of the black vote and huge turnouts from that demographic. Hell, they could run Idi Amin and win with a little help from Hollywood and Bruce Springsteen. And if anyone dared to question his birth certificate they'd be labeled as racists and birthers by 95% of the media. This is game over. Really.

Tom
01-14-2013, 01:22 PM
Not yet.
Tea Party events are already being planned.
We might even invite hcap to be a guest speaker, you know, stand up comedians being so expensive and all......:lol:

mostpost
01-14-2013, 06:36 PM
Your failure to address ANY of the points I just made proves their validity. Like a true liberal, you are whistling past the graveyard.
Your points have no validity. Hcap is probably as tired of arguing with the willfully uninformed as I am. You said.

Republicans will not win a presidential election in our lifetimes as long as:
1.) Democrats make it easy for people to collect a government check for sitting on their asses.
The number of people on welfare in the United States is 4.3M. That is one and one half percent of the population. It makes a lot of sense to target that 1-1/2% to win an election. That is a sarcastic remark by the way. There are currently 5.6M collecting unemployment. All of those people would rather feed, house, and clothe their families on less than $15,000 a year than get a job that earns two or three times that amount. More Sarcasm.
2.) Democrat voters of a a few particular demographics keep banging out babies out of wedlock.
By "particular demographics" you are of course referring to those damn Sherpas who do nothing but screw and reproduce. White people have children. "Sherpas" bang out babies. Just the phrasing is despicably racist.
3.) Democrat politicians keep getting away with playing the race card, the gender card, the class card, etc.
I have no doubt that you will accuse me of playing the race card for my reply in #2. I could care less-or I could not care less-one of those.
If it's playing the race card to oppose Republican efforts to curtail the black and Hispanic vote then I am guilty. If it is playing the gender card to oppose Republican efforts to curtail women's reproductive rights and job equality then I proudly say yes I do.
4.) Democrat politicians allow unions to get away with all sorts of nonsense at taxpayer expense in return for votes.
Are you referring to nonsense like better paying jobs for their members? Are you referring to nonsense like job security and safe working conditions? Maybe you are talking about health care and retirement. The only nonsense here is the nonsense you spout every time you touch the keyboard.

Does anyone in the lower class give a rat's ass about the national debt? Nope!
I am sure they do. I am also sure they are too busy worrying about their own debt to do much about it. Too busy worrying about the vultures like you who are trying to take away the little they have.
Does anyone in the lower class care about unemployment? Nope.
The fact that you ask this question only proves your ignorance.
Does anyone in the lower class care about diminishing well paying jobs for which they will never qualify? Nope.
This is a question you should ask Mitt Romney and his ilk.

In short, this is basically the end of America. Anyone with any serious money who is NOT in some way protected by a Democrat administration that publicly demonizes the rich but privately winks at their rich supporters would have to be crazy to continue living here (and that includes older upper middle class people). The blatant arrogance of this president and his enablers has set the stage for a mass exodus of wealth and jobs that will not return in our lifetimes. It's sad how the worthless non-producers of this country have voted for its demise in return for the crumbs they are thrown.
Feel free to leave any time. I am embarrassed to have you living in my country.

lamboguy
01-14-2013, 06:49 PM
i really don't understand how the only conservative republicans that are not happy with the current president post on this board.


this guy has made the very same moves as his predecessor and then some. he gave away plenty of corporate welfare and screwed the middle class more than the last guy. he took the patriot act one step further than Bush with the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT that he signed like the mouse he is on new years eve.

he is pussyfooting around with gun bills just like the guy before him.


how can you guys possibly complain about this guy?

redshift1
01-14-2013, 07:02 PM
150/1 on Moochelle is an OVERLAY. As I've said before, Dems could keep running blacks and always get 95% of the black vote and huge turnouts from that demographic. Hell, they could run Idi Amin and win with a little help from Hollywood and Bruce Springsteen. And if anyone dared to question his birth certificate they'd be labeled as racists and birthers by 95% of the media. This is game over. Really.

Don't worry Christie is in the wings and the only thing that keeps him from the Oval Office will be the party hardliners who seem intent on running figurehead presidents from a pool of senescent fools and semiliterate cowboys.

.

Mike at A+
01-14-2013, 07:10 PM
1.) Many of those people only qualify for MINIMUM WAGE JOBS. They have NO SKILLS. So your ASSumption that I am implying that they are turning down jobs paying "TWO OR THREE" times that amount ($15K), is WRONG (as you usually are).
2.) There was no mention of "race" in point #2. That is, until you commented.
3.) I was referring to things like your hero 0bama saying things like "punish your enemies" and referring to his grandmother as a "typical white woman". We won't even get into the things Biden and other Dems have said. There is CLEARLY a double standard on this. Sharpton, Jackson, Watters and the other race baiters.
4.) Actually I'm referring to things like physical assaults, intimidation, break ins, vandalism, getting high on the job and monetary bailouts to pension plans that no one else gets. I'm sure there is much more but you are not worth the time for me to go looking for it.

"Their own debt" is all relative. If you are a flunkie in life, you don't get the same material things others get. You don't buy flat screen TVs and jewelry when you should be buying food for your kids and paying health insurance premiums. You DO WITHOUT those LUXURIES until you can afford them.

People ON THE DOLE (and view that as their permanent way of life - as in GENERATIONAL WELFARE) DO NOT CARE about the unemployment rate. Repeat, they DO NOT CARE. As long as that check arrives on time, they're good.

And finally, Mitt Romney has NOTHING to do with this. We're going into 0bama's 5th year and the toilet is swirling at its fastest pace ever. WAKE UP.

Mike at A+
01-14-2013, 07:46 PM
Don't worry Christie is in the wings and the only thing that keeps him from the Oval Office will be the party hardliners who seem intent on running figurehead presidents from a pool of senescent fools and semiliterate cowboys.

.
Christie is going nowhere. The media will treat him like any other Republican. Too many people in this country don't want to lift a finger to better themselves. We live in an era of entitlement, laziness and arrogance. In other words, voters who will vote for whoever gives them the most free stuff.

Lefty
01-14-2013, 08:04 PM
you can go right on betfair and lay 5-1 and against Clinton for as much as your heart desires.

Not if you live in the U.S. Wish it were so. I'd love to be able to bet on Betfair.






__________________________________________________ ____________-

http://swopenews.com