if republicans are supposedly the party of rich elites...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,503
50,657
136
It's impossible to, the way you've set it up. Originally it was outside of politics. Now it's also outside of that and law and military too. So far anyways.

Apparently being a professor, the director of a nonprofit, and an author doesn't count either.

I bet John Kerry would be sad to know that he got three purple hearts for wounds suffered in a fake job. Maybe he should have had his family finance an investment in a baseball team instead.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,862
7,395
136
Just don't let corporatists like Bush and Cheney ever get ahold of the executive branch ever again. Assholes like them that are hard-wire programmed to turn a profit for themselves and their ilk any way they can at anyone else's expense will again lead our country right back down the shitter so long as they can do what their business-minded upbringing dictates: Loot and scoot, loot and scoot.
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
It's impossible to, the way you've set it up. Originally it was outside of politics. Now it's also outside of that and law and military too. So far anyways.

No. Law was in the OP, which has not been edited.

I can't help that people can't read.
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
Just don't let corporatists like Bush and Cheney ever get ahold of the executive branch ever again. Assholes like them that are hard-wire programmed to turn a profit for themselves and their ilk any way they can at anyone else's expense will again lead our country right back down the shitter so long as they can do what their business-minded upbringing dictates: Loot and scoot, loot and scoot.

I'd rather have someone who knows how to operate within a budget and how to run an organization than someone who thinks that spending is the cure to everything.

Look at the current state of things: MASSIVE debt, country more divided than ever before, more people not working than ever before, more people relying on the government to eat than ever before, our stance in the eyes of the world at its lower point ever. All for what?
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,103
28,699
136
I'd rather have someone who knows how to operate within a budget and how to run an organization than someone who thinks that spending is the cure to everything.

Look at the current state of things: MASSIVE debt, country more divided than ever before, more people not working than ever before, more people relying on the government to eat than ever before, our stance in the eyes of the world at its lower point ever. All for what?
As long as the rich get richer, it's all good.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,862
7,395
136
I'd rather have someone who knows how to operate within a budget and how to run an organization than someone who thinks that spending is the cure to everything.

Look at the current state of things: MASSIVE debt, country more divided than ever before, more people not working than ever before, more people relying on the government to eat than ever before, our stance in the eyes of the world at its lower point ever. All for what?

Well, the problem with that is that governing a nation is totally unlike running a for-profit business. Just ask any Repub president, all of whom never ever operated within a budget because they were too busy ransacking the treasury for family and friends and exploiting the working class looking for even more loot.

As for the expansion of gov't to assist the underprivileged and destitute, just who do you think are driving the self-sufficient middle class into that category faster than ever before? It's the looters and scooters that controls the economy a whole lot more than anyone else, that's who. ;)
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Are you fucking serious? Why dont you ask Venezuala how they are doing with their bus driver president? Some conservatives, such as yourself, seriously need to sit down, shut up, and let the smart people make the decisions. You want simpletons elected just to make you feel like you are as smart as these people you perceive as elite. I can promise you that you are not. You are a mental midget next to the likes of the Clintons or Obama, and I'll throw Paul Ryan in there just for balance.

You're the kind of Democrat people hate. You realize that, right?
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Why are they the party that elects people who have had jobs other than being a politician?

Obama, Kerry, Gore, Clinton, Dukakis, Mondale, all were career politicians. You have to go back to 1976 and Carter to find someone who had a job that wasn't in law or politics.

I guess I don't understand how a party who only nominates the ruling class are supposed to be the ones looking out for the workers.

Are you just pulling my leg or trolling/ignorant? CBD maybe?
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
I'd rather have someone who knows how to operate within a budget and how to run an organization than someone who thinks that spending is the cure to everything.

Look at the current state of things: MASSIVE debt, country more divided than ever before, more people not working than ever before, more people relying on the government to eat than ever before, our stance in the eyes of the world at its lower point ever. All for what?

Then you have nobody?
 

tracerbullet

Golden Member
Feb 22, 2001
1,661
19
81
No. Law was in the OP, which has not been edited.

Funny to exclude it right away, but other occupations were brought up as well. I assume you saw them but are ignoring them.

Well since none of them were nominated for president its just another strawman.

If you're being all semantic and stuff, you didn't mention "elect" as only being presidential nominations.

If you squint at it correctly you may yet be technically correct, but what most people see as a rather clear insinuation of your first post has long since been disproved.

Funny it's still being discussed. Of course I'm guilty of humoring you as well.
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
Funny to exclude it right away, but other occupations were brought up as well. I assume you saw them but are ignoring them.



If you're being all semantic and stuff, you didn't mention "elect" as only being presidential nominations.

If you squint at it correctly you may yet be technically correct, but what most people see as a rather clear insinuation of your first post has long since been disproved.

Funny it's still being discussed. Of course I'm guilty of humoring you as well.

Its funny to exclude them right away, but before I added them after. Which is it?

I didn't mention "elect" as only being presidential nominations? I listed all the democrat presidential nominees going back to 1976. I didn't realize there were people with your poor level of reading comprehension on here. I'm sorry for that.

What other occupations were brought up? So far only Kerry and his band aid purple heart were brought up.
 

tracerbullet

Golden Member
Feb 22, 2001
1,661
19
81
Its funny to exclude them right away, but before I added them after. Which is it?

? Please rephrase your question.

I didn't mention "elect" as only being presidential nominations? I listed all the democrat presidential nominees going back to 1976. I didn't realize there were people with your poor level of reading comprehension on here. I'm sorry for that.

Correct, you did not. Funny how you sometimes get technical about what you did and did not say and ignore any insinuations, and at other times it's more convenient to rely on those insinuations as being obvious.

What other occupations were brought up? So far only Kerry and his band aid purple heart were brought up.

Look, really, read the replies to your thread. You may not like the other examples, may not think they have merit, but they are there. It's really not difficult.