Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Robot Rubio beep boop beep
Comments
-
Needed to lean back with more throttle. With the paddle tires, he should have been able to skip the puddle.haie said:2001400ex said:
Can't wait for all those people calling Obama a liar because he didn't fulfill every campaign promise to watch Trump not fulfill one campaign promise.CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:Meanwhile Trump says every 10 minutes, "we're gonna build a wall, it's gonna be a GREAT wall, and Mexico is going to pay for it" and nothing happens.
Fucking republicans are coogin' this shit.
Trump is going to call Ford and tell them to close Mexican operations and build cars in America again.
-
If he had to debate Hillary right now it would be a trainwreck. As has been pointed out, Rubio has a problem of sticking to memorized speeches and hugging the same talking points. But I see the same problem with Trump and Bernie too. Trump is all about building a wall, banning Muslims, and winning because he's the most awesome winner to ever win. Bernie *always* has to get back to his points of "fuck the 1%, fuck wall street, free college for everyone, tone down the military."HeretoBeatmyChest said:Rubio is a total lightweight. I'm not sure he would play so well in the general.
It gets them all by (for the most part) in inter-party debates because there's a much smaller discrepancy of viewpoints on a lot of issues, and many of which don't even need to be brought up because of the unanimous inter-party agreement on them. But when 1v1 presidential debates come around and big time issues and attacks are brought up, I'm not convinced any of them can hold their own *at this point in time* against serious and experienced debaters. Their lack of experience will definitely show
Whether you like them or not, the experience of Hillary/Kasich/Bush/Christie makes them much more suited for general election debates than the Rubio/Trump/Bernie crowd. The exception is Ted Cruz, who has similar experience to Rubio but has shown he has a more concrete personal political philosophy (as well as debate skills) that will translate well to a general election. -
NEsnake12 said:
If he had to debate Hillary right now it would be a trainwreck. As has been pointed out, Rubio has a problem of sticking to memorized speeches and hugging the same talking points. But I see the same problem with Trump and Bernie too. Trump is all about building a wall, banning Muslims, and winning because he's the most awesome winner to ever win. Bernie *always* has to get back to his points of "fuck the 1%, fuck wall street, free college for everyone, tone down the military."HeretoBeatmyChest said:Rubio is a total lightweight. I'm not sure he would play so well in the general.
It gets them all by (for the most part) in inter-party debates because there's a much smaller discrepancy of viewpoints on a lot of issues, and many of which don't even need to be brought up because of the unanimous inter-party agreement on them. But when 1v1 presidential debates come around and big time issues and attacks are brought up, I'm not convinced any of them can hold their own *at this point in time* against serious and experienced debaters. Their lack of experience will definitely show
Whether you like them or not, the experience of Hillary/Kasich/Bush/Christie makes them much more suited for general election debates than the Rubio/Trump/Bernie crowd. The exception is Ted Cruz, who has similar experience to Rubio but has shown he has a more concrete personal political philosophy (as well as debate skills) that will translate well to a general election.
If you think Cruz translates well in the general election, you're a fucking idiot.
-
This. The only hope the GOP has, unless Hillary gets indicted, is that somehow Rubio can get his shit together or Kasich can get traction. Cruz and Trump aren't going to win. Of course I said Trump wouldn't win a single state in the primary. I'm an idiot.ThomasFremont said:NEsnake12 said:
If he had to debate Hillary right now it would be a trainwreck. As has been pointed out, Rubio has a problem of sticking to memorized speeches and hugging the same talking points. But I see the same problem with Trump and Bernie too. Trump is all about building a wall, banning Muslims, and winning because he's the most awesome winner to ever win. Bernie *always* has to get back to his points of "fuck the 1%, fuck wall street, free college for everyone, tone down the military."HeretoBeatmyChest said:Rubio is a total lightweight. I'm not sure he would play so well in the general.
It gets them all by (for the most part) in inter-party debates because there's a much smaller discrepancy of viewpoints on a lot of issues, and many of which don't even need to be brought up because of the unanimous inter-party agreement on them. But when 1v1 presidential debates come around and big time issues and attacks are brought up, I'm not convinced any of them can hold their own *at this point in time* against serious and experienced debaters. Their lack of experience will definitely show
Whether you like them or not, the experience of Hillary/Kasich/Bush/Christie makes them much more suited for general election debates than the Rubio/Trump/Bernie crowd. The exception is Ted Cruz, who has similar experience to Rubio but has shown he has a more concrete personal political philosophy (as well as debate skills) that will translate well to a general election.
If you think Cruz translates well in the general election, you're a fucking idiot. -
If this were the 40's and the debates were on the radio, I'd agree. Cruz says much smarter things and generally has his shit together relative to the others. His problem is these things are televised and recorded, and he looks way too creepy saying his smart things to have a prayer in the general election.NEsnake12 said:
If he had to debate Hillary right now it would be a trainwreck. As has been pointed out, Rubio has a problem of sticking to memorized speeches and hugging the same talking points. But I see the same problem with Trump and Bernie too. Trump is all about building a wall, banning Muslims, and winning because he's the most awesome winner to ever win. Bernie *always* has to get back to his points of "fuck the 1%, fuck wall street, free college for everyone, tone down the military."HeretoBeatmyChest said:Rubio is a total lightweight. I'm not sure he would play so well in the general.
It gets them all by (for the most part) in inter-party debates because there's a much smaller discrepancy of viewpoints on a lot of issues, and many of which don't even need to be brought up because of the unanimous inter-party agreement on them. But when 1v1 presidential debates come around and big time issues and attacks are brought up, I'm not convinced any of them can hold their own *at this point in time* against serious and experienced debaters. Their lack of experience will definitely show
Whether you like them or not, the experience of Hillary/Kasich/Bush/Christie makes them much more suited for general election debates than the Rubio/Trump/Bernie crowd. The exception is Ted Cruz, who has similar experience to Rubio but has shown he has a more concrete personal political philosophy (as well as debate skills) that will translate well to a general election. -
Just realized I just said Ted Cruz could have won an election in the 40's. I meant based on his debate abilities. Obviously no hispanic would have had a prayer back then. Obvious correction is obvious.
-
Why? What has Hillary ever done to make people think she'll beat anyone?Swaye said:
This. The only hope the GOP has, unless Hillary gets indicted, is that somehow Rubio can get his shit together or Kasich can get traction. Cruz and Trump aren't going to win. Of course I said Trump wouldn't win a single state in the primary. I'm an idiot.ThomasFremont said:NEsnake12 said:
If he had to debate Hillary right now it would be a trainwreck. As has been pointed out, Rubio has a problem of sticking to memorized speeches and hugging the same talking points. But I see the same problem with Trump and Bernie too. Trump is all about building a wall, banning Muslims, and winning because he's the most awesome winner to ever win. Bernie *always* has to get back to his points of "fuck the 1%, fuck wall street, free college for everyone, tone down the military."HeretoBeatmyChest said:Rubio is a total lightweight. I'm not sure he would play so well in the general.
It gets them all by (for the most part) in inter-party debates because there's a much smaller discrepancy of viewpoints on a lot of issues, and many of which don't even need to be brought up because of the unanimous inter-party agreement on them. But when 1v1 presidential debates come around and big time issues and attacks are brought up, I'm not convinced any of them can hold their own *at this point in time* against serious and experienced debaters. Their lack of experience will definitely show
Whether you like them or not, the experience of Hillary/Kasich/Bush/Christie makes them much more suited for general election debates than the Rubio/Trump/Bernie crowd. The exception is Ted Cruz, who has similar experience to Rubio but has shown he has a more concrete personal political philosophy (as well as debate skills) that will translate well to a general election.
If you think Cruz translates well in the general election, you're a fucking idiot. -
None of these fucks seem qualified to me.allpurpleallgold said:
Why? What hasSwaye said:
This. The only hope the GOP has, unless Hillary gets indicted, is that somehow Rubio can get his shit together or Kasich can get traction. Cruz and Trump aren't going to win. Of course I said Trump wouldn't win a single state in the primary. I'm an idiot.ThomasFremont said:NEsnake12 said:
If he had to debate Hillary right now it would be a trainwreck. As has been pointed out, Rubio has a problem of sticking to memorized speeches and hugging the same talking points. But I see the same problem with Trump and Bernie too. Trump is all about building a wall, banning Muslims, and winning because he's the most awesome winner to ever win. Bernie *always* has to get back to his points of "fuck the 1%, fuck wall street, free college for everyone, tone down the military."HeretoBeatmyChest said:Rubio is a total lightweight. I'm not sure he would play so well in the general.
It gets them all by (for the most part) in inter-party debates because there's a much smaller discrepancy of viewpoints on a lot of issues, and many of which don't even need to be brought up because of the unanimous inter-party agreement on them. But when 1v1 presidential debates come around and big time issues and attacks are brought up, I'm not convinced any of them can hold their own *at this point in time* against serious and experienced debaters. Their lack of experience will definitely show
Whether you like them or not, the experience of Hillary/Kasich/Bush/Christie makes them much more suited for general election debates than the Rubio/Trump/Bernie crowd. The exception is Ted Cruz, who has similar experience to Rubio but has shown he has a more concrete personal political philosophy (as well as debate skills) that will translate well to a general election.
If you think Cruz translates well in the general election, you're a fucking idiot.Hillaryany of the candidates ever done to make people thinkshe'llthey'll beat anyone?
-
I'm not sure that even Cruz's mother actually likes him, which is probably a good place to start for anyone interested in winning national elections.
-
I believe the correct term is madre.doogsinparadise said:I'm not sure that even Cruz's mother actually likes him, which is probably a good place to start for anyone interested in winning national elections.
