Poll: Clinton has 9-point lead over Trump

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Again, anything you twist is of no importance to me. Better that you stick to the trump excuse threads where you can fail in good company.

You were presented with five major issues on which Congress stymied Obama, including some where his attempted work-arounds were shot down by the Supreme Court.  Rather than addressing them, you just punt with his ad hominem.

[DiogenesLamp]

Clinton has 9-point lead over Trump

Oh good.   The Fake poll which said it was an 11 point lead has now been replaced by another fake poll that has dropped to 9.   

[Norm Lenhart]

You have just revealed you don't know how Congress works.

Gay marriage?   How does one "stop" gay marriage when the Democrats in the Senate could filibuster it?  And it takes a Constitutional Amendment to override a Supreme Court decision.  Try getting 2/3 of the House to agree to that.

Obamacare was expanded by executive action.  Again, the GOP Congress did its best to get OCare repealed, but, of course, there's that filibuster again.

As for the rest, I never figured you for a conspirazoid.  Just what exactly would Obama have been impeached for?

Are you serious? He defied a federal judge's order. You think that warrants a game of chess?

And you really need to reread my statement on GM because clearly you didn't.

[sinkspur]

LA Times poll which predicted the margin of victory last time, showing Trump still leading:

http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

The LA Times poll is using a completely different methodology this cycle so to compare it to 2012 is disingenuous. 

When a poll is completely out of sync with all the others, it's what's called an outlier.   The LATimes poll has been an outlier this entire general election cycle. 

[Norm Lenhart]

You were presented with five major issues on which Congress stymied Obama, including some where his attempted work-arounds were shot down by the Supreme Court.  Rather than addressing them, you just punt with his ad hominem.

When you get around to the numerous issues I have presented you with you ducked over the last couple months, I'll consider answering yours. Not until.

[DiogenesLamp]

Idiot response. Senate does not vote for everything Obama demanded. The Senate will be the only stopping a USSC nominee.

That is incredibly naive.   Republican Senators always fall over backward in rushing to support Democrat President Supreme Court nominees.   The only reason they held it off this year is the fear of potential punishment at the hands of voters who would be furious with them if they did what they usually do.   


After November,   If Hillary wins,  they are going to rush through a vote on Obama's nominees. 

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

That is incredibly naive.   Republican Senators always fall over backward in rushing to support Democrat President Supreme Court nominees.   The only reason they held it off this year is the fear of potential punishment at the hands of voters who would be furious with them if they did what they usually do.   


After November,   If Hillary wins,  they are going to rush through a vote on Obama's nominees.

Well under certain circumstances they will have to. If they lose the Senate the guy Obama put up is far milder than what HIllary & Dem Senate may come up with.


This is called politics and sometimes you have to punt.

[sinkspur]

Are you serious? He defied a federal judge's order. You think that warrants a game of chess?

And you really need to reread my statement on GM because clearly you didn't.

Obama did not defy any judge's order. 

Some people here are so wedded to the idea that the GOP Congress gave Obama everything he wanted that they refuse to see reality.

[Norm Lenhart]

Obama did not defy any judge's order. 

Some people here are so wedded to the idea that the GOP Congress gave Obama everything he wanted that they refuse to see reality.

Sink, until you get a little reading done,  you should stop now. You can start with how many times he refused to comply with congressional subpeonas up to and including a judge giving him IIRC 2 weeks to comply with a judges order. Which he did not. You can search on Immigration, IRS, Bhenghazi for starters.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

When you get around to the numerous issues I have presented you with you ducked over the last couple months, I'll consider answering yours. Not until.

Oh, I don't care if you answer my posts.  I simply enjoy pointing out where you are wrong.  So to reiterate, you said:

Why? They voted in sum for everything Obama demanded of consequence.

and

For an idiot response it accurately reflects how Obama was able to pass all his major issues.

It has since been pointed out multiple times, by various posters, that Obama did not get everything major that he wanted, but was in fact stymied on some major issues.  Those issues have been listed, and you've ducked them all.

And in terms of the numerous issues you've presented me with that I've ducked, you're going to have to refresh my recollection.  I never do that intentionally, and if anything slipped, it was only because I didn't post at all for an extended period.

[DiogenesLamp]

Well under certain circumstances they will have to. If they lose the Senate the guy Obama put up is far milder than what HIllary & Dem Senate may come up with.


This is called politics and sometimes you have to punt.

Hey,  wait!  Aren't most people around here opposed to pragmatism?   


You are making too much sense.   Stop it!   Stop it now!   

[Norm Lenhart]

Oh, I don't care if you answer my posts.  I simply enjoy pointing out where you are wrong.  So to reiterate, you said:

and

It has since been pointed out multiple times, by various posters, that Obama did not get everything major that he wanted, but was in fact stymied on some major issues.  Those issues have been listed, and you've ducked them all.

And in terms of the numerous issues you've presented me with that I've ducked, you're going to have to refresh my recollection.  I never do that intentionally, and if anything slipped, it was only because I didn't post at all for an extended period.

Those are todays issues. Go back 2 months and start there.

If you didn't notice, you're being blown off out of a complete lack of respect for you or anything you have to say. Do both of us a favor. Take the hint and we;ll both be better people for it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

That is incredibly naive.   Republican Senators always fall over backward in rushing to support Democrat President Supreme Court nominees.

Too true.

The only reason they held it off this year is the fear of potential punishment at the hands of voters who would be furious with them if they did what they usually do.

Well, yes...but regardless of the reason, isn't that still a pretty big plus over the alternative? 

After November,   If Hillary wins,  they are going to rush through a vote on Obama's nominees.

Only because Garland is likely better than whom Hillary might nominate.  And there just aren't enough hardcore votes in the Senate to deny a newly elected President her choice.  But it's not the fault of the Senate that the Trump looks to be squandering the opportunity the Senate would have given him to appoint his own justice.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Those are todays issues. Go back 2 months and start there.

Eh?  Each of the issues I listed were Congressional rejections that were more than 2 months back....

If you didn't notice, you're being blown off out of a complete lack of respect for you or anything you have to say. Do both of us a favor. Take the hint and we;ll both be better people for it.

Actually, I'm not.  You're still answering.  And even if you stopped, others might be amused/interested in my witty repartee.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Well under certain circumstances they will have to. If they lose the Senate the guy Obama put up is far milder than what HIllary & Dem Senate may come up with.


This is called politics and sometimes you have to punt.

PTL!

Truth is, there are way too many squishy moderates in Congress, so any hard-line attempt to defund the government was doomed to fail.  If that happened, then those conservatives who did push for defunding would be pilloried by a compliant leftist press for engaging in political stunts that accomplished nothing.  We accomplish nothing of note, and lose seats.

Nothing wrong with limiting the battles you fight to ones you think you can win.

[HonestJohn]

That is incredibly naive.   Republican Senators always fall over backward in rushing to support Democrat President Supreme Court nominees.   The only reason they held it off this year is the fear of potential punishment at the hands of voters who would be furious with them if they did what they usually do.   


After November,   If Hillary wins,  they are going to rush through a vote on Obama's nominees.

If Hillary wins, Obama will likely withdraw his nomination of Merrick, leaving the Senate with no one to confirm.

[HonestJohn]

Sink, until you get a little reading done,  you should stop now. You can start with how many times he refused to comply with congressional subpeonas up to and including a judge giving him IIRC 2 weeks to comply with a judges order. Which he did not. You can search on Immigration, IRS, Bhenghazi for starters.

Which has exactly what to do with your original assertion?

[geronl]

Nearly three-quarters of Republicans polled after the debate said the GOP House and Senate candidates should back Trump.

78% support among your own party in the general election is a death knell. You have no chance.