Presidential Race 2016

Soapyfrog · 2016-02-10T08:31:02.000Z

Scuzz:

I was sure 6 weeks ago it would be Trump-Cruz because they were so buddy buddy. They even had made a few appearances together. But all it took was for Cruz to outshow Trump in a few polls and bingo, the war was on. No, I think Trump will pick someone who isn’t among the top candidates.

Kim Kardashian remains my prediction.

Scuzz · 2016-02-10T08:51:45.000Z

Soapyfrog:

Kim Kardashian remains my prediction.

or his own daughter

Telefrog · 2016-02-10T08:53:55.000Z

Johnny Depp plays Donald Trump in The Art of the Deal: The Movie.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/ad38087bac/donald-trump-art-of-the-deal-movie?cc=d&_ccid=42f8d0abe784381a

50 minutes!

Timex · 2016-02-10T09:00:21.000Z

Papageno:

What we could do is stop spending bazillions on boondoggle military hardware projects like the F-35_Lightning_II. But, you know, bribes ^H^H^H “free speech.”

What fighters are you planning on using in the future?

inactive_user · 2016-02-10T09:09:38.000Z

Pyperkub:

I’d say 4 decades of tax policy has been enabling, if not subsidizing. I wouldn’t classify the sixties and seventies that way.

ShivaX:

Now, now. We didn’t really start that in earnest until around the 80’s or so.

These are both valid points. I would like to amend my statement thusly:

“To be fair, the fucking vampire class has been getting rich on the blood of real Americans for four decades after infiltrating and colonizing policy-making bodies. We must rise up now to stake these abominations in the very seats of their power or face the real risk of becoming a permanent cattle class, kept solely for sustenance and the occasional bit of amusement.”

CraigM · 2016-02-10T09:14:01.000Z

Timex:

What fighters are you planning on using in the future?

Maybe not a jack of all trades, master of none? Perhaps spending that money to make 2-3 different models that are more suited to their roles, instead of a ballooning requirement list that is self contradictory and subsequently causing repeated design issues.

Dan_Theman · 2016-02-10T09:15:40.000Z

Timex:

What fighters are you planning on using in the future?

I vote for X-Wings, although perhaps the A-Wings might be a lower cost alternative for the budget-conscious legislature to mull over.

Timex · 2016-02-10T09:17:34.000Z

CraigM:

Maybe not a jack of all trades, master of none? Perhaps spending that money to make 2-3 different models that are more suited to their roles, instead of a ballooning requirement list that is self contradictory and subsequently causing repeated design issues.

So, what actual planes would those be?
And do you expect that developing a bunch of separate airframes would end up costing less overall, including deployment costs?

I mean, when we say things like, “We shouldn’t spend money on the F-35” that means you need to actually have an alternative… and it seems like the alternative is “use airframes which were designed in the 1970’s.”

inactive_user · 2016-02-10T09:23:32.000Z

Dan_Theman:

I vote for X-Wings, although perhaps the A-Wings might be a lower cost alternative for the budget-conscious legislature to mull over.

X-Wings are a fantastically versatile craft, with a souped-up powerplant that can maintain acceptable combat speeds while powering full-craft shields and the signature quad laser cannons and a payload of proton torpedoes that can give smaller capital ships like the Victory-class Star Destroyers and various frigates and gunboats nightmares.

Depending on operational needs, though, you’re right - the A-Wing is an exceptional dedicated anti-fighter vessel whose remarkable agility and concussion missile loadout makes it ideal for sweeping smaller threats from the skies. Its lesser power needs lead to a lower price tag for fleets that don’t require the heavier armament of the X-Wing or even the antiquated Y-Wing reference designs.

Mr_PeaCH · 2016-02-10T09:24:38.000Z

Timex:

This has been covered before, but the reality is that the US has military missions which extend over the entire globe. That’s why we are required to spend so much.

If you don’t want to spend that much, then you need to be willing to leave those jobs undone. And I think a lot of folks who oppose US military spending are simply unaware of what those jobs actually are. They aren’t really aware of what our military does beyond our borders, and imagine that the world would just keep rolling along without us if we weren’t involved. This belief is incorrect.

Thanks for the explanation about why we spend what we spend but this aspect isn’t the point. I am in agreement that we outspend the rest of the world militarily by a huge margin. My question is: Why wasn’t the journalist aware of it? Or why did he phrase his question to Trump as “What will you do to make the US military #1 in the world again” as if to say we aren’t now

Timex · 2016-02-10T09:28:11.000Z

Mr_PeaCH:

Thanks for the explanation about why we spend what we spend but this aspect isn’t the point. I am in agreement that we outspend the rest of the world militarily by a huge margin. My question is: Why wasn’t the journalist aware of it? Or why did he phrase his question to Trump as “What will you do to make the US military #1 in the world again” as if to say we aren’t now

Well, honestly, I think he was just asking Trump for an explanation of his own statement. The US military is most certainly still the strongest in the world. It may not be strong enough to do everything we need it to in the coming years, but that’s different than it being weaker than another military.

Getting explanations from Trump is like trying to nail jello to the wall though. He has no real answers to anything, and his imbecile supporters don’t care.

HumanTon · 2016-02-10T12:20:22.000Z

So Fiorina is out.

(And reports have it that Christie may be out in a few hours.)

Tin_Wisdom · 2016-02-10T12:29:27.000Z

I wonder who will get her voter?

vyshka · 2016-02-10T12:32:34.000Z

Tin Wisdom:

I wonder who will get her voter?

Gilmore 2016!

TranquilityBase · 2016-02-10T12:42:25.000Z

While Trump is still picking the flesh from his fangs, Jeb! is busy strategerizing:

Washington (CNN)Former president George W. Bush will join his brother former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in South Carolina to campaign.

Keep on Jebbin’!

Miramon · 2016-02-10T12:54:23.000Z

At first Jeb! no doubt figured it would be best to keep W as far away as possible. Now, what the hell. Maybe there are some people in SC who still haven’t recovered from whatever they were on when they voted for W back in the day.

Stepsongrapes · 2016-02-10T12:58:39.000Z

Miramon:

At first Jeb! no doubt figured it would be best to keep W as far away as possible. Now, what the hell. Maybe there are some people in SC who still haven’t recovered from whatever they were on when they voted for W back in the day.

It’s the right move. He has to do something different. He can’t pull the crazies or the evangelicals. His original plan was probably to go for the voters who value executive experience, but it’s clear that there are precious few of those. He’s got to go for the nostalgically conservative (“the way things were before 'Bama”) to try to pull from Rubio and get him out of the race so that he gets all of the establishment voters.

The fall of the executive/gubernatorial candidate is another symptom of the ideology-driven elections of the past few cycles. The presidential election is a job interview where no one cares whether you’ve had experience doing the next closest job. We care more about the president as a symbol, rather than as an vocation.

Telefrog · 2016-02-10T13:00:35.000Z

vyshka:

Gilmore 2016!

I keep forgetting this guy exists.

Pyperkub · 2016-02-10T13:14:53.000Z

vyshka:

Gilmore 2016!

That would be Happy Gilmore, right?

Wallapuctus · 2016-02-10T13:22:00.000Z

Timex:

What fighters are you planning on using in the future?

The planes we have now that were made like 30 years ago perform better than the F-35. If we need planes to fight battles against badguy planes, we should not use the F-35 because it is broken and shitty.

EDIT: The F-16 was made 40 years ago, sorry.