
by New Jerzylvania » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:28 am

by Community Values » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:31 am

by The Qeiiam Star Cluster » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:33 am

by Benuty » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:33 am

by New Jerzylvania » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:36 am
The Qeiiam Star Cluster wrote:My opinion: he doesn't have enough name recognition to make much of a difference.

by Ifreann » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:38 am
New Jerzylvania wrote:Evan McMullin, 40, a former CIA officer with 10 years in the agency has announced he is running as a candidate for president of the United States. He has resigned as chief policy director of the House Republican Conference this morning to pursue his candidacy.
Evan McMulllin is also a Mormon and could be a factor in Utah and swing states with significant Mormon populations such as Nevada. Mr. McMullen will only be able to qualify for 244 electoral votes as it stands right now, however lawsuits may change that, as in the case of John Anderson in 1980.
IMHO, this could be an implementation of the CIA's first contingency plan to prevent a Donald Trump presidency, which of course is mere speculation on my part.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/cia-agen ... d=41201256
Comments?

by Poisonapple » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:44 am

by New Jerzylvania » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:55 am
Ifreann wrote:New Jerzylvania wrote:Evan McMullin, 40, a former CIA officer with 10 years in the agency has announced he is running as a candidate for president of the United States. He has resigned as chief policy director of the House Republican Conference this morning to pursue his candidacy.
Evan McMulllin is also a Mormon and could be a factor in Utah and swing states with significant Mormon populations such as Nevada. Mr. McMullen will only be able to qualify for 244 electoral votes as it stands right now, however lawsuits may change that, as in the case of John Anderson in 1980.
IMHO, this could be an implementation of the CIA's first contingency plan to prevent a Donald Trump presidency, which of course is mere speculation on my part.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/cia-agen ... d=41201256
Comments?
Alan M. Thread toiled for decades to perfect the megathread to save us from having to wade through multiple new threads every day for months at a time every four years. Honour his memory by making use of the US election megathread.

by Major-Tom » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:17 am
Poisonapple wrote:He could become the fulcrum in deciding Nevada and Utah to be sure. It's also not good news for Gary Johnson in Utah. In Arizona, where polls have recently shown the race has Trump leading Clinton by 2% also has a Mormon population of 4 or 5%. This could also help Clinton.

by Poisonapple » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:23 am
Major-Tom wrote:Poisonapple wrote:He could become the fulcrum in deciding Nevada and Utah to be sure. It's also not good news for Gary Johnson in Utah. In Arizona, where polls have recently shown the race has Trump leading Clinton by 2% also has a Mormon population of 4 or 5%. This could also help Clinton.
Obama led Romney in a few Arizonan polls around the same time. Romney carried the state by 10%. Anyone who says that states like Georgia, Arizona, Texas, and Utah are in play aren't thinking.

by Individual Concerns » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:26 am

by The Guaranteed Eternal Sanctuary Man » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:32 am
Individual Concerns wrote:I applaud the man's audacity.
To think that a significant percentage of the American public (of which many think the country is run by the CIA anyway) would rally behind an agent (former or not) of the CIA is as brave as it is laughable.

by The Liberated Territories » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:38 am

by Individual Concerns » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:43 am
The Guaranteed Eternal Sanctuary Man wrote:Individual Concerns wrote:I applaud the man's audacity.
To think that a significant percentage of the American public (of which many think the country is run by the CIA anyway) would rally behind an agent (former or not) of the CIA is as brave as it is laughable.
Bush 41.

by Ifreann » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:54 am
New Jerzylvania wrote:Ifreann wrote:Alan M. Thread toiled for decades to perfect the megathread to save us from having to wade through multiple new threads every day for months at a time every four years. Honour his memory by making use of the US election megathread.
This may be an important candidacy in deciding several states plus he has CIA linkage which makes this very interesting for speculation. I do not know if he has a party backing him yet, or if that is in it's infancy. However, the latest Trump v. Clinton thread went through 500 pages in 3 weeks and was hard to keep up with at the speed pages would fly by. So perhaps, as with the Libertarian thread being separate thread, this is a worthy thread on it's own, with all due respect to the fictitious A. M. Thread. A moderator will make that decision, if necessary

by Pope Joan » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:57 am

by Southerly Gentleman » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:03 am
Pope Joan wrote:The GOP deserves this for being so quick to trash Hunstman for being "too pro Chinese". Like being the most experiences and savvy candidate on all things Asian was somehow a fault.


by Individual Concerns » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:32 am
Pope Joan wrote:The GOP deserves this for being so quick to trash Hunstman for being "too pro Chinese". Like being the most experiences and savvy candidate on all things Asian was somehow a fault.

by New Jerzylvania » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:47 am
Individual Concerns wrote:Pope Joan wrote:The GOP deserves this for being so quick to trash Hunstman for being "too pro Chinese". Like being the most experiences and savvy candidate on all things Asian was somehow a fault.
No.
The GOP has earned both Trump and and McMullin by mostly ignoring, and sometimes giving the finger to its constituancy for the last eight years.
Actually, truth be told, this has been a simmering problem, particularly since Bush 41, where the disconnect between GOP officers and their constituants has sharply widened.
John Q. Republican is beyond fed up with pulling the lever for people who will not honor their campaign platforms, and more often than not, act in direct defiance of their constituants.


by The Lone Alliance » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:51 am

by New Jerzylvania » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:53 am
Nariterrr wrote:A bit to late

by The Romulan Republic » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:54 am

by Ifreann » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:55 am
New Jerzylvania wrote:Nariterrr wrote:A bit to late
Yo win, yes. But not to effect the out come in states with significant Mormon population. Do you care to argue that?
If somehow the gap narrows between Hillary and Trump, one of those states could be decisive. Doesn't look like that now, but CIA guys like to make sure, ya know?

by The Lone Alliance » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:55 am
New Jerzylvania wrote:Nariterrr wrote:A bit to late
Yo win, yes. But not to effect the out come in states with significant Mormon population. Do you care to argue that?
If somehow the gap narrows between Hillary and Trump, one of those states could be decisive. Doesn't look like that now, but CIA guys like to make sure, ya know?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Canarsia, EuroStralia, Great Nelson, Senkaku, Torisakia, Washington Resistance Army, Xi Jinping Thought, Yasuragi
Advertisement