Originally posted by psmith81992
He just shut cooper up lol.
He did 🙂
I don't think he's too right.
Well yea, you identify as further right than him, don't you? But considering all the people who want a president with more progressive policies, he's not going to do well in the left wing party.
He'd make a fine independent or moderate Republican (inasmuch as they exist any more- they've mostly been primaried out of office), but he doesn't has as strong a stance on social issues as Hillary or, well, any of the rest, his economics are more moderate... there's just little appeal there to me or most Democrats.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Cooper hammering on her about Benghazzi, He must have his facts wrong or is lying, Cause according to everyone here on the liberal side, she did noting wrong.
According to me, who posts on it often, the results of numerous Republican-lead probes are, to quote Politifact check,
There were seven previous congressional probes into the Benghazi attack. Saying these committees were led "mostly by Republicans" is also a fair assertion: the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs were the only two committees not led by Republicans. As for her comment that there was no overt wrongdoing, just room for improvement, that’s a rosy assessment. But it is also largely accurate. We rate this claim Mostly True.
Then again, big posts are hard for you and you seem to have memory problems sometimes, so maybe I shouldn't be too hard on you for not knowing?
Heck, just listen to House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy:
""Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee, [and] what are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she's untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened." -McCarthy
Admitting the probes are mostly to affect her poll numbers.
Like I've said from the beginning: Could she have done better by having different policies in place ahead of time? Yes. Was she guilty of any wrongdoing as you insist?
Nope, not according to your own party's probes into the matter.
You cannot take being blindsided by something and turning it into a criminal matter or similar just by wanting it to.
Originally posted by psmith81992
Actually him and i are about the same as far as the right goes. He would have made regan proud.
Well, there you go. I agree with everything in that sentence, which is also why he's not a great fit for the Democrats, who are not all that near Reagan.
This being a Democratic primary, that leaves him in a tough spot where he's unlikely to do well, while if the party alignments were different things could be different.
Reasonable politician, but the wrong flavor here.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Sorry Q, I got tired of reading your long ass posts.
Woosh, Time once again admits posts are too hard for him just coincidentally when it includes information from multiple sources that contradicts his pre-assumed conclusions.
It's really obvious how his posting style relies on ignoring inconvenient information.
Time, you aren't interested in debating things or gaining any knowledge of what's going on in politics, you just wanna cover your ears and declare yourself right!