Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-10-2010, 07:02 PM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hi_im_god View Post
because like the majority of californians, i'm pro-choice and fiorina isn't.

and because fiorina doesn't believe people on the "no fly" list should be restricted from buying guns.

those are 2 actual difference's that would keep me from voting from her.

not that i'm in love with boxer.

but i might have been tempted by a pro-choice, "i can't believe what i'm hearing" (during the debate when fiorina wouldn't oppose gun right's for people on the "no fly" list) tom campbell.

her story includes being fired by hewlett packard. and shipping jobs to china beforehand. there are plenty of campaign issues.

this is more political handicapping than endorsing the incumbent. i think the republican party in california is more aligned with public opinion in s. carolina than it is with public opinion in california. hell, i think the palin endorsement of fiorina helps boxer more than fiorina in this state.

i could be wrong. but i'd lay odds the national republican party puts no significant money in this race.
Why would you care who is pro-choice? It's a non-issue for a Senator. If we were talking about Fiorina vs Boxer for the US Spureme Court, then it would obviously be a real issue.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-10-2010, 07:05 PM
hi_im_god's Avatar
hi_im_god hi_im_god is offline
Arlington Park
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin View Post
Why would you care who is pro-choice? It's a non-issue for a Senator. If we were talking about Fiorina vs Boxer for the US Spureme Court, then it would obviously be a real issue.
because she gets to vote on supreme court nominee's in the senate.

and federal legislation designed to narrow or undercut roe v. wade.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-10-2010, 07:23 PM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hi_im_god View Post
because she gets to vote on supreme court nominee's in the senate.

and federal legislation designed to narrow or undercut roe v. wade.
Fair enough.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-10-2010, 09:46 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Alvin is a space-filler or something. It will be interesting to see what the heck falls out of there.

Edit: this Mr. Green thing is getting very interesting (go watch any of the TV interviews with this poor man and his lawyer). The guy is unemployed, but submitted a $10,400 filing fee? There are also two other races in SC where "Dems" with no money, no experience, no apparent campaigning won. Have the famous GOP burglars turned into funding fake candidates into races, to try and ensure the GOP candidate wins?


The real fun over the next 4 months will be Sharron Angle. Let that whacko loose!

Sad, birther Orly didn't do better. That would have made for an awesome election runup
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts

Last edited by Riot : 06-10-2010 at 11:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.