RNC/Soccer League Debate: Relegation and Promotion
People who follow British Association Football (Soccer, Football, Footie) know that it consists of a number of tiered Leagues which have annual processes of relegation and promotion as the bottom performing teams move down a tier while the top performing ones in the lower tier move up.
Play online and have the chance to win incredible money prizes by going to this website https://onlinecasinoreviewsuk.com.
I suggest we might have something like this going on with the first few Republican debates. For example while it certainly sucks for Perry and Graham to be relegated to the kiddy table at 5PM, somebody is going to emerge as the apparent winner of that group. While it is likely that one or two or three of those in the lucky top ten will flame out. For example Christie might have fared better had he been nosed out and not be faced with having to out shout and out bluster The Donald at the main event. Similarly whatever tiny chances Graham and Jindal have for clinging into the race probably would have evaporated if they had snagged a 9 or 10 spot. In contrast Perry is not in a bad spot at no 11 and even Santorum might have a chance to move up. But I am thinking this maybe a one time event with the two or three relegated out of the top ten not likely to ever crawl back in. Biggest football fans can get unparalleled coverage of football events on SportScore.
All this is speculative but I can easily see the bottom four or five of that bottom seven be flushed out of the race along with the bottom two of the top ten with maybe Perry and Santorum replacing Christie and Huckabee. So the questions are “How many tickets out of Thursday?” and “Can anyone leverage the Kiddy Table to get asked to the Grownup one for the next debate?” All I’m sure of is you can purchase the best Premier League tickets for tourists at Football Ticket Pad.
Or you can consider all this silly and just call it a Politics and Debates Open Thread.
There’s not a serious candidate in the bunch.
Sadly, not looking like there’s any serious candidate on the other side either.
This is not a popularity contest. This is about who is most capable to lead our country back to prosperity. Greatness is to me just another vague term or political expression of something that carries no real meaning to me. Please define. As being said , what are we great at? spending, creating debt. What is so great about that? But on the other hand if you want to bring back prosperity to America that would be a great thing. I can see a very clear path to prosperity by doing 3 things. 1. elect a strong leader that is not stuck inside the box of new ideas and change dynamics. Someone who can and will make things happen and is not afraid to do so…2. Close off the border to cheap and illegal labor that has been undermining all middle class jobs pay and wage elasticity for a long time…3. Bring in the Balanced Trade Agenda with variable rate tariffs will make China, Japan and Korea cry but or economy will come roaring back with new opportunity that we have never seen before. The economy is not just about 6 or 10 companies on the NASDAQ. It is about doing what needs to be done to bring about the best positive change for the majority not just the top 10%. Most candidates are incredulous but one has the capability to do what we need to do to turn this country around…”To bring about positive change you have to make it ok to have the conversation”. Alan Mulally. Change favors the connected mind.
Right now it is a popularity contest. Because I could grant you every point you make and still ask which of these guys has the bare minimum needed to be an effective domestic and foreign policy executive.
For someone of my politics they all would be disasters but I can see two maybe three of them who wouldn’t have us in a shooting war or make us the mockery of the world.
Kasich. A serious, experienced guy with a reported anger problem. But actually is the “Severe Conservative” that Romney labeled himself as well as having a tiny tinge of the “Compassionate Conservative” of GWB. The only one in the field that has me worried.
Bush. Comes equipped with a kitchen cabinet of folk who can at least manage the levers of government. But beginning to prove that he really is the Dim Son of the Family.
Then who?
Christie? Buffoonish and a cronyist of the worst kind, but probably as good a President as Harding was.
Dead Eyes Walker? Crooked and mean. But competent enough in an oily way.
Rubio? Needs some more mileage. Plus some of his Florida antics are still catching up to him. Crooked and nice.
But the rest of them:
Huckabee? Snake oil salesman and horrible chump as governor – a number of rapists and cop murderers got paroles and pardons by the oldest trick in the book the “Come to Jesus” moment.
Cruz? Megalomaniac who is hated by his colleagues.
Carson? Great motivational speaker, inspiring story, all of which qualifies him to replace the great Dr. Koop as Surgeon General and Moralist in Chielf. Commander in Chief? I think not.
Rand Paul? All over the board, one second a libertarian and isolationist another a culture warrior and hawk. Panderer in Chief is his best title possibility.
And then Trump. What more can be said?
BTW I am curious Ryan. While I fully agree that of this field “Most candidates are incredulous” I am thinking that word doesn’t mean exactly what you intended – (damn autocorrect maybe?) I am quite curious about “one has the capability to do what we need to turn this country around”. Unless it actually is Alan Mulally who hasn’t thrown his hat in the ring.
Because surely you don’t mean The Donald. All he has is popularity and the admiration of the New Know Nothing Party.
Bruce, I don’t disagree with you analysis. I do disagree with your use of family style analogy, i.e. adult table, kiddie table, etc. There is not one candidate at any table who has expressed adult ideas regarding their candidacy. I would prefer the old rankings used for the intellectually disabled, moron, idiot, imbecile.
William, Nor do I disagree with your analysis of the needs of the country for a more populist candidate, of which there are none unless you consider Bernie Sanders as having a reasonable chance. However, when you state, “But on the other hand if you want to bring back prosperity to America that would be a great thing.” you are missing an important point in regards to political power inn America. Those in control from both the economic and political sides of the system are enjoying a great deal of prosperity and have been for many decades past. They have no need for change as you or I might describe progress.
Until the financial connection is severed from the political system we are not going to have change. So long as the national media is in the grips of corporate America the people will not even recognize their need for a change. Note that most of the political debate deals with social issues that stem from fear, bigotry and ignorance and, worse yet, religious preferences.
“I do disagree with your use of family style analogy”
I see you have never been to a full family gathering at my house. Actually no one has except that one day back in I think 1986, because every other time my brothers and me all get together there is some huge fight and someone storms out. Which may not be a bad post-debate descriptor on Thursday. There are adults and adults (and adult beverages). Just sayin’
Sometimes, I think we’d be better picking names out of the phone book.
How about this for a serious proposal.
For the next debate just set a threshold of 3% and no Kiddy Table. And then maybe 5% for the debate after that. Instead of Soccer we just do it like military officer promotions: up or out.
It is conceivable that if a front runner stumbles that you would still have 10 making the cut at 3%. But I am doubting it. And this would leave room for my promotion/relegation result, just working off poll numbers and not position.
Regardless……Speaking as someone who will not be voting Democrat regardless of the candidate for the Republicans. The only candidates who have even a slight chance with the base that will be putting them in office are….Trump, Cruz and Walker.
Those that can’t imagine a U.S.A. with one of these men as your President….you had better brace yourself because it is going to be.
Of course, the Republican establishment and the media will only consider Jeb as the only viable candidate, but my read on the base is, that Bush, Christie and Perry are the only ones that the base will not vote for. If they rig it for one of these men, then Hillary is your next President. ENJOY!
So the ‘shorter’ here is: “It’s Hillary”
Thanks Jeff, here I was worrying for nothing.