Lyin' Ted Cruz!

Jarod said:
The only examples Trump generally gives is what "Raphael" did to Carson in Iowa and how he has changed his stance on immigration.
Click to expand...

I see you suddenly have time to troll Norah, but none to list Hillary Clintons' accomplishments as a public servant.
 
Legion Troll said:
Hastily threw something together after I shamed you into it, I see.

You provided a summary of her CV.

No one is denying she held all those positions, thanks to who she married.

What, if anything, did she accomplish in those positions?

Did she implement a national healthcare plan as First Lady?

Did she sponsor any important legislation and persuade her colleagues to pass it as a Senator?

Did she broker any deals as Secretary of State that can be viewed as successful?

What has she done, Counselor?
Click to expand...

As I have told you, I have a list of those things I am not going to reconstruct it, I have posted it several times and when I feel like it, I will get it and post it again for you.

You know better.

If you read my post listing the positions she has held, You know I said that simply holding those posts gave her the "experience" that makes her the most qualified to be President.

Now, I voted for Sanders... that's because he is also qualified (less so than she is) but I like his policies and ethics better than I like hers.
 
hey jarod.......what difference does it make?
219.png


we already know you support liars and alleged criminals with the letter D on their names while you lambast other liars and alleged criminals with an R.
 
Jarod said:
In this thread alone I have (once again) discussed HRC's qualifications to be president.
Click to expand...

You have?

You mean this trite recitation of the positions her husband's clout allowed her to hold?


Jarod said:
Several months ago I listed a huge amount of them, you can look for it, or I will likely have time later. While she has many accomplishments, its not as much those accomplishments that speak to her qualifications to be president, it is her experiences that have given her the knowledge of the office of the Presidency that makes her unique as a candidate. She served as advisor and lead to many taskforces as first lady of Arkansas (not a typical first lady, but one involved in the project of governing), she has seen the job of Governor first hand. She served as advisor and as chair of the healthcare taskforce in her husband's presidency, She served in the Senate as a representative of New York during the Bush Administration, She served as Secretary of State in the Obama Administration. Those experiences alone make her the most educated about the American Presidency as anyone I can think of. She has seen the job of Governor and President as few have. She has been a Senator and Secretary of State having given her an up close view of two more presidencies. She has a multitude of accomplishments that I have previously listed.
Now if you disagree with her policies, you might not vote for her, but her qualifications are self evidence to anyone who understands her history.
Click to expand...

If "she has a multitude of accomplishments that I have previously listed", how come you can't list one?
 
Jarod said:
I said that simply holding those posts gave her the "experience" that makes her the most qualified to be President.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

Time served does not equal accomplishment.

Experience does not equal accomplishment. Judging by her lack of accomplishments, I'd say her experience has taught her very little.

What did she do as First Lady - a post she did nothing to earn?

What did she do as a Senator - a post her husband's political clout secured for her?

What did she do as Secretary of State - a post she was thrown as a consolation prize?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
hey jarod.......what difference does it make?
219.png


we already know you support liars and alleged criminals with the letter D on their names while you lambast other liars and alleged criminals with an R.
Click to expand...

I support ideology and those I believe will help bring a government reflective of that ideology into being. They are all liars, and being alleged to be a criminal means nothing to me.
 
Jarod said:
If you say so. I understand HRC and Sanders and the Democratic Party. I also understand the stick against them by most Conservatives and am tired of it. I prefer to discuss what I cant understand which is support for the likes of Trump or Cruz. So far, few are willing to defend them or the Republican party and thus I am not enjoying this election season as much as I have enjoyed them in the past. Discussing the benefits and weaknesses of GWB, McCain and Romney was fun for me. I wish some would start trying to defend Cruz or Trump.

I do join in when others start threads about my party... I defend the candidates I like. I have spent hours explaining Benghazi and emails to people who lacked understanding and simply adopted the party narrative. Ill continue to do that. Even in this thread alone I have (once again) discussed HRC's qualifications to be president.

I think its you who is uncomfortable discussing the state of the "Conservative" candidates and Republican party. You are not alone, its like pulling teeth to get people to discuss it this election season. Damocles and most of the reasonable Conservatives have all but fully disappeared. You, Cawacko, are someone I consider a generally reasonable conservative, but you wont discuss the elephant in the room. Pun intended.
Click to expand...

I've started numerous threads about Trump and what I don't like. I've made numerous posts about my thoughts on the current Republican Party and what I think. No liberals here want to discuss Hillary and Bernie other than to say I support Bernie in the primaries and will vote for Hillary in the general. No discussion of the differences or battles between the two and their different visions for the Democratic Party.

So yeah, when people who can't be honest about what's going on in their own party want to have an 'honest' discussion about the other party it doesn't exactly resonate.
 
Legion Troll said:
I disagree.

Time served does not equal accomplishment.

Experience does not equal accomplishment. Judging by her lack of accomplishments, I'd say her experience has taught her very little.

What did she do as First Lady - a post she did nothing to earn?

What did she do as a Senator - a post her husband's political clout secured for her?

What did she do as Secretary of State - a post she was thrown as a consolation prize?
Click to expand...

I would say that many first lady's did nothing to deserve the position, I would not say that about HRC.
I don't think her husbands political clout was the only thing that helped her get elected senator, many first lady's could not have gotten elected to such a position.
 
cawacko said:
I've started numerous threads about Trump and what I don't like. I've made numerous posts about my thoughts on the current Republican Party and what I think. No liberals here want to discuss Hillary and Bernie other than to say I support Bernie in the primaries and will vote for Hillary in the general. No discussion of the differences or battles between the two and their different visions for the Democratic Party.

So yeah, when people who can't be honest about what's going on in their own party want to have an 'honest' discussion about the other party it doesn't exactly resonate.
Click to expand...


Read this very thread, I have discussed HRC much more than the original topic. As happens in most threads about Trump and the Republican party... they immediately turn into a trash fest about HRC.
 
Jarod said:
I would say that many first lady's did nothing to deserve the position, I would not say that about HRC.
I don't think her husbands political clout was the only thing that helped her get elected senator, many first lady's could not have gotten elected to such a position.
Click to expand...

You're entitled to think what you like, Counselor.

The evidence speaks for itself.

If she has "many" accomplishments, why do you need time to come up with one?
 
Jarod said:
Read this very thread, I have discussed HRC much more than the original topic. As happens in most threads about Trump and the Republican party... they immediately turn into a trash fest about HRC.
Click to expand...

That dog won't hunt, Counselor.

I dislike Trump, Cruz and Republicans generally, as evidenced by the record of my posts.

So, since you need "time" to name a single accomplishment of Hillary's, don't you think that's telling?
 
Jarod said:
Read this very thread, I have discussed HRC much more than the original topic. As happens in most threads about Trump and the Republican party... they immediately turn into a trash fest about HRC.
Click to expand...

I see no liberals discussing Hillary or Bernie or the Democratic race in this thread. (other than you defending Hillary)
 
I see nobody trashing Hillary.

What I do see is a marked inability to name a single thing she has accomplished for the nation, despite many years of "experience".
 
Jarod said:
Read this very thread, I have discussed HRC much more than the original topic. As happens in most threads about Trump and the Republican party... they immediately turn into a trash fest about HRC.
Click to expand...

I also remember many threads where you stated, very clearly, that you did not support HRC, that you did not think her presidential material, that sanders was way more qualified. wonder what happened?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I also remember many threads where you stated, very clearly, that you did not support HRC, that you did not think her presidential material, that sanders was way more qualified. wonder what happened?
Click to expand...

I never said she is not presidential material.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top