When did losing an e******n become a stepping stone to running for president? When did losing an e******n become a stepping stone to running for president? Beto O'Rourke and Stacey...

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

When did losing an e******n become a stepping stone to running for president?

Beto O'Rourke and Stacey Adams both lost their most recent e******ns and now they are considered for the presidency? In 1960, Richard Nixon was very narrowly defeated by John Kennedy for the presidency. Nixon then ran for governor of California and was defeated by Edmund 'Gerry' Brown, Sr., father of the recent former governor. That defeat was engineered behind the scenes by Robert Kennedy; the Kennedys wanted to take Nixon out of the mix for the '64 nomination. In 1968, Nixon had to live down the reputation as a loser, finally winning the nomination and the e******n. Today, we have two losers now being touted as potential nominees for 2020.

Rip van Winkle, did I miss something?

EL Loc: Massachusetts

crazylibertarian wrote:

When did losing an e******n become a stepping ston... (show quote)

Nope! We're getting a LOT of losers these days. I worry a lot about AT After Trump!
Not only losers but loonier and loonier.
Have a good one!!

Carol Kelly

crazylibertarian wrote:

When did losing an e******n become a stepping ston... (show quote)

No, I don’t think you missed anything. It’s all about race, sex and socialism. Our President, may God Bless him, said last night that America will never be Socialist to thunderous applause. We’re nt we proud of him? Best State of the Union address I’ve ever heard.

Carol Kelly

EL wrote:

Nope! We're getting a LOT of losers these days. I worry a lot about AT After Trump!
Not only losers but loonier and loonier.
Have a good one!!

The very true t***h. A lot of nuts running around making promises they can’t keep.
A lot of other nuts listening to them. They cheer, ha ng on every word, quote them, and sadly, v**e for them.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

crazylibertarian wrote:

When did losing an e******n become a stepping ston... (show quote)

Would you not say Nixon is a pretty pathetic example of GOP greatness?

Or do you simply love criminals??

Carol Kelly

permafrost wrote:

Would you not say Nixon is a pretty pathetic example of GOP greatness?

Or do you simply love criminals??

In spite of it all, Nixon wasn’t a bad President. He accomplished a lot, but he made serious mistakes. Give a dog his due. The English liked him and couldn’t understand.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Carol Kelly wrote:

In spite of it all, Nixon wasn’t a bad President. He accomplished a lot, but he made serious mistakes. Give a dog his due. The English liked him and couldn’t understand.

That is true, I liked the EPA and OSHA most I think..

His mistake was getting caught..

bylm1-Bernie

permafrost wrote:

That is true, I liked the EPA and OSHA most I think..

His mistake was getting caught..

Spoken like a true l*****t. EPA? OSHA?

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

bylm1-Bernie wrote:

Spoken like a true l*****t. EPA? OSHA?

Are you mad at Nixon because he signed those and other bills. or because he was a criminal??

Much as I once detested Nixon, it was really Agnew that turned me inside out.. he lied right into the camera and I was stupid enough to believe he was a victim..

Damn that is d********g.. the creepy lawless insect that he was..

Of course now days, nothing either of those two did would amount to an ant hill compared to the
orange mountain of misdeeds done to the people of our nation who make it work..

have a nice night bylm/bernie... it is past my reading time and still a couple thing I wish to do..

tomorrow..

bylm1-Bernie

permafrost wrote:

Are you mad at Nixon because he signed those and o... (show quote)

Nighty, night, Frosty.

Trooper745 Loc: Carolina

permafrost wrote:

Are you mad at Nixon because he signed those and o... (show quote)

I think the silly crap you posted about Dodd-Frank is best repudiated by the below WSJ editorial.

Dodd-Frank: The repeal of President Obama's signature financial reform effort by a bipartisan 258-159 margin is a big victory for President Trump. But, while reformed, Dodd-Frank still lives.

First, the bill is an improvement on the job-k*****g, business-strangling Dodd-Frank law.

A Democrat-dominated Congress passed it in 2010 with only a few Republican v**es. The new law exerted unprecedented and sweeping controls over U.S. consumer financial markets — even though the consumer financial industry wasn't implicated at all in the 2008-09 financial crisis.

The new law somewhat reduces Dodd-Frank's role.

To begin with, it cuts the number of rules imposed on small banks and credit unions, who have been crushed by the cost of Obama-era financial rules, which favor the big banks.

It also makes it easier for banks to underwrite less-risky mortgages, as long as banks bear part of the risk. And it takes the government's foot off the pedal of financial company onerous bank and financial company supervision, which cost billions but did little to make financial firms more stable.

Worse, it leaves the corrupt Consumer Financial Protection Bureau intact, while still giving the government power over Big Banks when they get into trouble.

In the end, what many had hoped would be the complete repeal of Dodd-Frank, became only a partial reform. It was entirely due to the way Congress works: Republicans wanted a much bigger reform bill, but Democrats wouldn't go along.

So compromises were made by the GOP, yielding 33 moderate Democrat v**es in the House and 16 in the Senate. Because the Senate requires at least 60 v**es to pass most legislation without challenge on the floor, it was either compromise or there would be no bill. So Republicans c*********d.

The Economist news magazine called the reforms "timid." And former Rep. Barney Frank, whose name is on the Dodd-Frank law, acknowledged that legislation is now unlikely ever to be repealed in its entirety.

"The day that bill passes, that's the end of any significant legislation on Dodd-Frank," he said. "If the Democrats have the House, there will be no weakening whatsoever."

This was all made possible due to the 2008 e******n, that swept an unassailable Democratic majority into power for two years, during which they passed two of the great legislative disasters in U.S. history: ObamaCare, and Dodd-Frank.

E******ns have consequences, as President Obama said. One sad consequence of the 2008 e******n is that we are still living with two awful laws, one that did nothing to improve health care and the other that made our financial system materially worse and less stable.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

crazylibertarian wrote:

When did losing an e******n become a stepping ston... (show quote)

The precedent was set in November 2016..................which is how we got Trump.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Trooper745 wrote:

I think the silly crap you posted about Dodd-Frank is best repudiated by the below WSJ editorial.

Dodd-Frank: The repeal of President Obama's signature financial reform effort by a bipartisan 258-159 margin is a big victory for President Trump. But, while reformed, Dodd-Frank still lives.

First, the bill is an improvement on the job-k*****g, business-strangling Dodd-Frank law.

A Democrat-dominated Congress passed it in 2010 with only a few Republican v**es. The new law exerted unprecedented and sweeping controls over U.S. consumer financial markets — even though the consumer financial industry wasn't implicated at all in the 2008-09 financial crisis.

The new law somewhat reduces Dodd-Frank's role.

To begin with, it cuts the number of rules imposed on small banks and credit unions, who have been crushed by the cost of Obama-era financial rules, which favor the big banks.

It also makes it easier for banks to underwrite less-risky mortgages, as long as banks bear part of the risk. And it takes the government's foot off the pedal of financial company onerous bank and financial company supervision, which cost billions but did little to make financial firms more stable.

Worse, it leaves the corrupt Consumer Financial Protection Bureau intact, while still giving the government power over Big Banks when they get into trouble.

In the end, what many had hoped would be the complete repeal of Dodd-Frank, became only a partial reform. It was entirely due to the way Congress works: Republicans wanted a much bigger reform bill, but Democrats wouldn't go along.

So compromises were made by the GOP, yielding 33 moderate Democrat v**es in the House and 16 in the Senate. Because the Senate requires at least 60 v**es to pass most legislation without challenge on the floor, it was either compromise or there would be no bill. So Republicans c*********d.

The Economist news magazine called the reforms "timid." And former Rep. Barney Frank, whose name is on the Dodd-Frank law, acknowledged that legislation is now unlikely ever to be repealed in its entirety.

"The day that bill passes, that's the end of any significant legislation on Dodd-Frank," he said. "If the Democrats have the House, there will be no weakening whatsoever."

This was all made possible due to the 2008 e******n, that swept an unassailable Democratic majority into power for two years, during which they passed two of the great legislative disasters in U.S. history: ObamaCare, and Dodd-Frank.

E******ns have consequences, as President Obama said. One sad consequence of the 2008 e******n is that we are still living with two awful laws, one that did nothing to improve health care and the other that made our financial system materially worse and less stable.

I think the silly crap you posted about Dodd-Frank... (show quote)

Gee Trooper...

I am one of those who think banks/wallstreet need to be regulated.. they will l**t the nation at every opportunity.. if Dodd/Frank was not good, the they should have made it better when amended..

"Reform".. seems to be code word for "lets l**t the nation again""

As tax gift, remove the consumer protection efforts.. on and on..

I also feel The ACA was a great improvement..

Of course, I was denied coverage when I wanted it even when I was well able to pay for it and insured all my family, even 2 grand kids.. So I was uninsured for over 5 years.. lucked out..

bylm1-Bernie

permafrost wrote:

Gee Trooper... br br I am one of those who think... (show quote)

Did you have a good night's sleep, Frosty? Your comments about reform, ACA, etc are typical left-wing BS. How you guys can look at black and see white will always be a head shaker for me. I would be the first to admit that we conservatives are guilty, to some degree, of being biased, but when examining a list of l*****t statements, such as I read on OPP so often, it seems to me they are so counter to common sense that I am always puzzled. When you say that the ACA was an improvement, I throw up my hands. Do you really think that income redistribution is a GOOD thing. My, My!

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

lpnmajor wrote:

The precedent was set in November 2016..................which is how we got Trump.

Trump didn't lose the e******n.