Quote :

"Prepare yourself to hear "Are you ready to ruuuuumble?" until November and maybe beyond now that Linda McMahon is officially the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate seat from Connecticut being vacated by Sen. Chris Dodd. McMahon, who ran World Wrestling Entertainment with her husband Vince, handily beat former Republican congressman Rob Simmons. With more than 61 percent of the vote counted, McMahon had a lead of 20 percentage points over Simmons. Peter Schiff, a financial commentator, was running third with 22 percent of the vote. McMahon's victory, which wasn't a surprise, sets up a race with the state's popular Democratic attorney general, Richard Blumenthal who wasn't challenged for the Democratic nomination. McMahon spent a lot of her wrestling money to win the nomination, about $22 million."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/08/10/129118498/linda-mcmahon-wins-ct-gop-senate-nomination

What a loser. Maybe he should run for office in emerging markets or Austrailia and Canada.

8/11/2010 10:11:22 AM

8/11/2010 10:53:39 AM

?

I don't particularly like the guy, but I don't think he was really trying. He just got on youtube and asked a bunch of strangers who like his zany views to make phone calls on his behalf.

Seems more like a failed experiment than a failed campaign.

8/11/2010 10:59:22 AM

Quote :

"McMahon spent a lot of her wrestling money to win the nomination, about $22 million"

Yeah, he is such a loser. Like most elections, money wins the day.

8/11/2010 11:10:18 AM

the guy should have made a ton of predictions about winning
but then include a prediction about losing to someone because of money
then everyone could quote his prediction about how he lost on their facebook profiles and ask why no one listened to him because he predicted exactly what happened.

8/11/2010 11:14:29 AM

no idea who this guy is.

8/11/2010 11:23:04 AM

Watch the debate that happened and tell me that McMahon was the better candidate. It's good to see all the haters come out, though. We could have had someone with sense in the Senate. Now, we'll have another career politician...exactly what we need.

If people had actually known who Schiff was, he would have had a chance. Articles and news stories rarely even mentioned Schiff. You can't really compete with someone that's willing to drop tens of millions of dollars on the campaign, though. Our electoral system is dominated by money, but that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

8/11/2010 11:29:42 AM

Blumenthal's a huge douche. Looks like CT's senator will suck regardless.

8/11/2010 12:34:41 PM

^^ I guess your'e assuming he beats McMahon.

The McMahons will pour a lot of money into this, at this point I wouldn't really count this as a complete win for Blum.

I know, it's crazy talk, but when it comes to getting what they want I don't underestimate the McMahons.

8/11/2010 2:16:51 PM

Quote :

"Watch the debate that happened and tell me that McMahon was the better candidate."

McMahon is the better canidate. Schiff talks about a bunch of crap that a senator has little to do with whereas McMahon talks about things a senator has little power over controlling. He's not running for Fed Chairman or POTUS, he should stop debating like he is. He sounds the same as Ron Paul, a whole lot of talk about big changes and revolution and doing absolutely nothing about it.

Quote :

"If people had actually known who Schiff was, he would have had a chance."

I think you meant to say "if people had actually cared who Schiff was".

Quote :

"Our electoral system is dominated by money, but that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone."

Waaah waaah waah. If he would have been as good as you say he would have gained the interest and financial support to get there.

8/11/2010 2:24:08 PM

Quote :

"If people had actually known who Schiff was, he would have had a chance. Articles and news stories rarely even mentioned Schiff. You can't really compete with someone that's willing to drop tens of millions of dollars on the campaign, though. Our electoral system is dominated by money, but that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone."

google news search peter schiff

8/11/2010 2:31:38 PM

Quote :

"McMahon is the better canidate. Schiff talks about a bunch of crap that a senator has little to do with whereas McMahon talks about things a senator has little power over controlling. He's not running for Fed Chairman or POTUS, he should stop debating like he is. He sounds the same as Ron Paul, a whole lot of talk about big changes and revolution and doing absolutely nothing about it."

No, she's not. She won't beat Dick Blumenthal. Her only real qualification is that she has enough money to buy her way in. Her understanding of economics is almost as unsatisfactory as yours, and from hearing her speak, most people on this forum are more informed on the issues than she is.

A single senator can make a lot of difference. For as much as you guys whine about "abuse of the filibuster," it is an effective tactic. Peter Schiff would have fought for what he thought was right, with no regard for re-election. We need statesmen, not people that are more concerned with staying in office than doing what needs to be done.

Saying that Ron Paul has done nothing is an ignorant statement.

Quote :

"I think you meant to say "if people had actually cared who Schiff was"."

Schiff, in polls, had very high approval among people that had heard of him. If your point is that people don't care about the candidates that aren't directly fed to them by the media, then maybe you're right.

Quote :

"Waaah waaah waah. If he would have been as good as you say he would have gained the interest and financial support to get there."

You serious? McMahon has spent over twenty million, and that was just for the primary. That's a lot of money to raise, even for a presidential campaign. Of course, she didn't raise that money for the most part...she already had it on hand. Schiff had a lot of support from people inside and outside of Connecticut, but you're delusional if you think that can overcome the sort of financial contribution that McMahon was willing to make on her own behalf.

The real issue is that when McMahon gets to Washington, she'll be just another establishment politician. She'll do what the party leadership wants her to do. She'll "compromise" on a bipartisan basis, she'll make special deals for her business partners. She'll be another business as usual Senator. That's the opposite of what we needed.

Quote :

"google news search peter schiff"

Yes, because people supporting or discussing Peter Schiff on the internet are the ones voting in a Connecticut GOP primary.

8/11/2010 4:21:02 PM

google news search

8/11/2010 4:21:49 PM

Great. Read some of the articles that ran in Connecticut. There were many examples throughout the campaign where Rob Simmons and McMahon were mentioned, but not Peter Schiff.

8/11/2010 4:25:55 PM

Quote :

"She won't beat Dick Blumenthal."

Neither will Schiff.

Quote :

"Peter Schiff would have fought for what he thought was right, with no regard for re-election."

He'd need to BE in office before he'd have to worry about STAYING in office.

Quote :

"Saying that Ron Paul has done nothing is an ignorant statement."

Ok, then name some stuff he's done. I mean I know his main goals; fairtax, gold standard, etc. And I know he's done none of that.
Maybe he's done some other stuff, but he certainly never talked about it, and that's what makes him a shitty congressman. Talk about shit you do and can do, not pipe dreams. This is why Schiff was not elected.

Quote :

"Schiff, in polls, had very high approval among people that had heard of him."

The only people who have heard of him are people who gave a shit, which was a very small fragment of the population, much like the percentage of the vote he got.
Shit man. Maybe everyone's not out to get you and your message just plain sucks?
Isn't that easier to believe than the media doesn't like you and she tricked people into voting for her?

8/12/2010 12:51:12 AM

Quote :

"d357r0y3r: The real issue is that when McMahon gets to Washington, she'll be just another establishment politician. She'll do what the party leadership wants her to do. She'll "compromise" on a bipartisan basis, she'll make special deals for her business partners. She'll be another business as usual Senator. That's the opposite of what we needed."

Given that she's using so much of her own money, what makes you think she'll be the same as anybody else?

I'm just saying, the lady who has groin-kicked guys seems like she might be slightly different than the other guy. Just a bit.




And you are so sure that she'll be exactly, exactly the same...that it kinda looks like you've been dumbly watching Schiff's YouTube videos for election and shit.

8/12/2010 2:55:24 AM

She's going to want a return on her investment. If you listen to her speak (I really suggest you youtube the GOP "debate" that took place earlier this year), it's clear that she doesn't have much of a background in politics. She's not even that great out tossing out feel good sound bites. Yes, she might know how to run a business, but she's not qualified to be a representative.

In any case, I don't think she'll beat Dick Blumenthal, so I doubt it'll be an issue.

Quote :

"Ok, then name some stuff he's done. I mean I know his main goals; fairtax, gold standard, etc. And I know he's done none of that. Maybe he's done some other stuff, but he certainly never talked about it, and that's what makes him a shitty congressman. Talk about shit you do and can do, not pipe dreams. This is why Schiff was not elected."

Fairtax is not one of his stated goals. I've heard him say that it would be preferable to an income tax, but he's not out there campaigning for it. Again, your ignorance is showing.

How does one person go about switching back to gold standard? Just off of the top of my head, Ron Paul has been a principled supporter of the constitution. He's voted against any bill that's unconstitutional, without exception. He's always been in opposition to war, even when it wasn't the popular thing to do. More recently, his audit the Fed bill has gotten a lot of support in the House, but the democratic leadership won't let anything happen with it.

He's never voted for a tax increase, he's never voted for an unbalanced budget, he's never voted to expand the power of the Executive branch. He's done exactly what a representative should do - uphold the constitution and attempt to limit the scope of government.

[Edited on August 12, 2010 at 11:33 AM. Reason : ]

8/12/2010 11:22:31 AM

Things Ron Paul has accomplished
still waiting...



People who are holding Ron Paul back from accomplishing things
Democratic leadership
Reality



Things he's voted for and hasn't voted for
Who gives a shit?

8/12/2010 11:46:02 AM

I guess in your world, the only worthwhile accomplishment a politician can make is fleecing the public. A noble cause, for sure.

8/12/2010 1:23:28 PM

Quote :

" He's never voted for a tax increase, he's never voted for an unbalanced budget, he's never voted to expand the power of the Executive branch. He's done exactly what a representative should do - uphold the constitution and attempt to limit the scope of government. "

That's actually what the judiciary is for. A representative should... you know... represent

8/12/2010 1:41:04 PM

Quote :

"I guess in your world, the only worthwhile accomplishment a politician can make is fleecing the public."

McMahon talked about reasonable goals that a republican senator could hope to accomplish, not just whine about how bad the government manages the economy and talk about pipe dreams.

8/12/2010 2:32:58 PM

Quote :

"That's actually what the judiciary is for. A representative should... you know... represent"

No, dude. The primary duty of all members of all branches of government is to uphold the constitution.

Quote :

"McMahon talked about reasonable goals that a republican senator could hope to accomplish, not just whine about how bad the government manages the economy and talk about pipe dreams."

Except it's not just "whining" when you vote a certain way, and get others to follow your lead - and not because there's something to be gained from it, but because it's the right thing to do.

Yeah, I get your point. If you're an outspoken minority in Washington, you shouldn't even bother convincing the other representatives that you're right. You should just fall in line and do what everyone else says you should do. That's the coward's way out, and while I'm sure that's the route you would take, that's not what the country needs.

Keep trying to marginalize the libertarian movement. That's the most effective tactic, because you're not going to win a battle of ideas. It worked for a while in 2008. It's not going to work in 2012, as we spiral deeper into depression. Give it your best shot, though.

8/12/2010 3:55:43 PM

Quote :

"No, dude. The primary duty of all members of all branches of government is to uphold the constitution. "

Then why are there amendments?

Quote :

"Except it's not just "whining" when you vote a certain way, and get others to follow your lead - and not because there's something to be gained from it, but because it's the right thing to do."

He won't be doing any of that because he didn't even get a nomination. My point is that he sucked in the debate and furthermore he sucks at life.

Quote :

"Keep trying to marginalize the libertarian movement. That's the most effective tactic, because you're not going to win a battle of ideas."

Yeah everyone is out to get you.
The point of the thread is that you guys act like the world hinges on him being nominated, but he didn't win and nothing of value was lost, because really, he wouldn't have done anything in power anyways.

8/12/2010 4:02:15 PM

Quote :

"Then why are there amendments? "

Destroyer supports slavery and the marginalization of women.

8/12/2010 4:20:52 PM

Quote :

"Destroyer supports slavery"

It's called illegal immigration.

8/12/2010 4:34:43 PM

Yeah, I sure hope that we continue to permanently decline for the sake of those gold prices, because if the early 1980s is any sign, if the economy gets back to near full employment, gold prices will crash. There's a reason why gold investors only advertised on shows like Coast to Coast AM and Alex fucking Jones up til recently...because historically it's not a very prudent investment. Maybe in small doses.

A more stable commodity might be like a wheat standard. Ron Paul should run on the wheat standard. Or pork bellies.

8/12/2010 5:22:52 PM

^ You're terribly ignorant about gold.

8/12/2010 5:38:04 PM

those commercials weren't actually selling gold though, just overpriced collectible gold coins

8/12/2010 5:53:12 PM

^Pretty sure the ads I'm remembering were for Swiss America, who is certainly a gold investing firm as well as a seller of coins, bullion, etc.

^^Care to cite any responsible investment sources which suggest gold as anything more than a hedge (maybe like 5% of your portfolio, tops)? How about investing in something that actually adds value or is a useful commodity for production and isn't just a ornamental metal that some people think looks purty. When the Apocalypse comes, do you want a box of gold or a box of rice? Say gold and everyone will just laugh at you as you try to trade inedible pretty rocks for useful things.

Not to mention, if you keep talking up depression and gold as bulwark against depression, you're going to create a new bubble.

[Edited on August 13, 2010 at 12:47 PM. Reason : .]

8/13/2010 12:42:10 PM

Quote :

"That's actually what the judiciary is for. A representative should... you know... represent"

Yes, the judiciary is also for that as a final "safety check" (and in reality doesn't really do much of anything), but representatives are obligated to stay within their constitutional bounds.



U.S. Constitution, Article 6:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.




The oath of office:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

(FYI, this is also the same oath taken by military officers. The enlistment oath is similar, but not quite the same.)



[Edited on August 13, 2010 at 1:03 PM. Reason : []]

8/13/2010 12:47:47 PM

^Those two uses mean completely different things in context.

8/13/2010 2:51:56 PM

Well of course...obviously I'm not (yet) in a position to legislate federal law, and Congressmen don't do a lot of warfighting. That's why I said "FYI"--the last part had nothing to do with my point.

8/13/2010 3:05:35 PM

I was refering to the use in your post versus destroyer's use

8/13/2010 3:44:32 PM

To note though, there was a recent study that pointed out only 11% of self-financed campaigns ever win. Speculation on what McMahon will do when she reaches Congress is premature.

8/13/2010 5:47:35 PM

Kris you seem to be very intelligent but you are the most delusional poster on this board.

Where did you get this brainwashing?


The premise of this thread is simply ridiculuous. His loss proves how destructive democracy has become in this country. Even when someone emerges with the best ideas, the most fortitude, and the willingness to serve the country not for personal gain but for individual liberties of the entire country he still loses to the money machine that keeps the insiders in and the outsiders out.

There is too much at stake to let someone who will buck the system into the senate. Period.

8/14/2010 12:05:21 PM

He lost to a woman who pretended to be comatose on national television as her husband berated her and iirc kicked her out of her wheelchair. Who ran a company that did necrophilia storylines and has been called out BY THE RIGHT numerous times over the last 15 years as being one of the smuttiest things on television.

Given that, I can't believe that Schiff just lost because he was outspent. Did he run a shitty campaign? Do the people of Conn. have some reason to just not trust him? Is he incompetent without his magic 8-ball?

It's not even like he just lost to McMahon, he came in THIRD.

[Edited on August 14, 2010 at 1:51 PM. Reason : http://www.dailypaul.com/node/142075]

8/14/2010 1:37:56 PM

Quote :

"The oath of office: ... 'So help me God.'"

100% unconstitutional and wrong.

8/14/2010 1:48:17 PM

^^ Isn't it obvious? The majority of the country does not want to hear the message Schiff is spreading.

They would rather vote for a person who gives them handouts and keeps the music running longer at the expense of future generations.

The majority of the country is not of the belief the US will be on it's knees in a few years. They are wrong.

8/14/2010 2:09:42 PM

aww... rallydurham has a man-crush. How cute.

[Edited on August 14, 2010 at 2:32 PM. Reason : ]

8/14/2010 2:32:03 PM

Quote :

"Kris you seem to be very intelligent but you are the most delusional poster on this board."

100% agree.

8/14/2010 2:36:46 PM

Quote :

"Even when someone emerges with the best ideas, the most fortitude, and the willingness to serve the country not for personal gain but for individual liberties of the entire country he still loses to the money machine that keeps the insiders in and the outsiders out."

What money machine? Do you think she's getting paid by lobbyists or something?
Also you are the most delusional poster on this board if you don't think Schiff is doing this in some part for personal gain.

Quote :

"It's not even like he just lost to McMahon, he came in THIRD."

She beat him by a huge margin as well.

8/14/2010 2:38:52 PM

^^^^

Quote :

"The easiest thing in the world for a politician to do is to tell you exactly what you want to hear. But if we want to finally solve the challenges we're facing right now, we need to tell the American people what they need to hear. "

-Schiff

[Edited on August 14, 2010 at 3:26 PM. Reason : ]

8/14/2010 3:08:02 PM

Quote :

"100% unconstitutional and wrong."

And 100% optional, due to the constitutional prohibition of "religious tests" in the very section that establishes the requirement for the oath...the one that I right about the oath.

Out of the top 100 things to get bent out of shape about regarding transgressions against the Constitution, that is somewhere around #100,000. By most peoples' measure, I'm an agnostic libertarian, and even I think that the optional "so help me God" doesn't even rate a post on TWW to decry it. Who cares?

8/14/2010 11:14:28 PM

Quote :

"Care to cite any responsible investment sources which suggest gold as anything more than a hedge"

How do you define responsible? The same sources that said housing will never go down? That buying tech stocks at eye popping valuations was a good idea? That buy and hold is an absolute truth?

Quote :

" How about investing in something that actually adds value or is a useful commodity for production and isn't just a ornamental metal that some people think looks purty."

How about I buy what is undeniably still in a bull market?

Quote :

"When the Apocalypse comes, do you want a box of gold or a box of rice? Say gold and everyone will just laugh at you as you try to trade inedible pretty rocks for useful things. "

And yet, humanity going back thousands of years progressed from barter to using shiny pretty things as a medium of exchange.

If you use Glenn Beck for the pro gold argument (or the gold bugs for that matter) and his detractors as the opposite side, then you're really missing the broad picture about gold as an investment vehicle.

Quote :

"Not to mention, if you keep talking up depression and gold as bulwark against depression, you're going to create a new bubble."

I hope there is a bubble in Gold. When the herd gets fully on board and whips itself into a latter about it, I'll be ready to hand them what they want at values vastly higher than I paid for it.

8/16/2010 5:02:00 PM

Quote :

"How about I buy what is undeniably still in a bull market?"

Understand it comes with significant risk, most people recommending gold attempt to ignore that.

Quote :

"And yet, humanity going back thousands of years progressed from barter to using shiny pretty things as a medium of exchange."

The world changes.

Quote :

"I hope there is a bubble in Gold. When the herd gets fully on board and whips itself into a latter about it, I'll be ready to hand them what they want at values vastly higher than I paid for it."

Everyone who loses their pants in the market always expected to get out at the peak.

8/16/2010 5:40:32 PM

Quote :

"Understand it comes with significant risk, most people recommending gold attempt to ignore that."

You know what else comes with significant risk? EVERY FUCKING ASSET YOU COULD POSSIBLY OWN. Especially in an environment where Keynesian clowns are running a printing press and the government thinks it knows better than the markets on how to run...the markets.

Quote :

"The world changes."

Oh, the ole, this time it will be different.

Quote :

"Everyone who loses their pants in the market always expected to get out at the peak."

Damn, you got me. I was expecting to be able to call the exact top to the decimalized cent in which to sale my stock.

8/16/2010 7:04:50 PM

Quote :

"You know what else comes with significant risk? EVERY FUCKING ASSET YOU COULD POSSIBLY OWN."

I'm not too worried about FDIC insured savings accounts.

Quote :

"Especially in an environment where Keynesian clowns are running a printing press and the government thinks it knows better than the markets on how to run...the markets."

Waah waaah waaaah

Quote :

"Oh, the ole, this time it will be different."

It's the fact that now it is different. Magnets would be worth more than gold because you can do more with them. Gold has little value for building anything.

Quote :

"Damn, you got me. I was expecting to be able to call the exact top to the decimalized cent in which to sale my stock."

A bubble can burst in the blink of an eye. All I'm saying is be careful. You aren't investing if you think you're going to win big, you're gambling.

8/16/2010 8:44:51 PM

you arent scared of FDIC savings accounts?

Why not?

The FDIC is bankrupt.

The government is bankrupt.

The banks were bankrupt and likely still are.

You own pieces of paper that earn no interest that the people you lent the money to can not afford to pay back...

You of all people should feel insecure...

8/16/2010 10:06:28 PM

THE END IS NEAR
TAKE THE RED PILL
WERE IN THE MATRIX

8/17/2010 12:07:42 AM

Those are inarguable facts not scare mongering. Its even reported by the mainstream media its not wingnut theories like your socialist ideas

8/17/2010 7:22:18 AM