"I'm going to be the nominee," states Newt Gingrich in confidence - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530319] [B]Why would I look "besides" a political background[/B] when determining the political aptitude of a potential politician? [/QUOTE] If this statement is an implication that one's political background is a decent indicator of one's political aptitude, I can not outright refute your claim without knowing what definitions of politician, or "political aptitude" you are choosing to use, but, I will make the claim that if you are using such an implication for the defense of President Obama's political or personal integrity, you ought to consider the following: If the majority of the current elected officials fail to represent those they govern(which is, at least from my perspective, one of the general grievances presented by Occupy Everywhere), then any association with the current elected officials might actually be a detriment to one's integrity as a politician. With the congressional approval rating as low as it is, it might be worth noting how many current senators were in office during the time Obama held his seat for Illinois, especially with the current controversy over S.1867(The bill that would provide provisions for the redefinition of the United States as a battlefield and for the indefinite imprisonment of US citizens. see: [URL="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.1867:"]http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.1867:[/URL] ) due to its passing of 97 to 3. It will be even more interesting to see what the President does with this bill. It is my personal opinion that Gingrich will not become the GOP nominee, and also that if Obama does not veto S.1867, then he is perhaps, a similar sort of danger as many of the GOP's potential candidates to the liberties of the citizens of the United States of America. Anyway, since the lot of you have mentioned politics, economics, and science, I bear gifts of Neil deGrasse Tyson: [video=youtube;dohU61DuEaI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dohU61DuEaI[/video]

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530726]It's the politicians following ideology instead of science who are useless Economically speaking, it's easy to see what works through testing and repeating Every country is a point of data See what works and do it dummy politicians, nobody should care if you're a "free market libertarian" if that economic system has never been proven to work[/QUOTE] Libertarianism is not an economic system, it's a political philosophy. It encompasses social issues too. I think the word you meant to use was "Capitalist", but that wouldn't work, considering it wouldn't work as an acceptable subject in your second phrase. Okay, I'll shut up now, just had to point that out.

Well aren't you an egotistical jackass, Gingrich?

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;33530353]Does nobody remember he divorced his wife so he could marry a staffer he was fucking WHILE he was speaker? And later divorced her too?[/QUOTE] Not to mention his first wife had cancer when he left her.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530447]What's this based on? I'm sure someone could painstakingly get the names of everyone Obama has hired and then go through their backgrounds one by one, but that wouldn't be practical. Is there a list somewhere?[/QUOTE] Obviously this is from 2009, but his cabinet hasn't changed that drastically: [img]http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/files/2009/11/obamacabinet2.jpg[/img]

Sounds like somebody's counting their eggs before they've hatched.

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;33532167]Sounds like somebody's counting their eggs before they've hatched.[/QUOTE] He just feeling cocky since he's gotten some of the support Herman Cain lost. It's only temporary, and soon he will go back to being obscure and petty again.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33532158] [img]http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/files/2009/11/obamacabinet2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] this graph doesn't really tell me anything

Still a long time to go to the convention. Wouldn't be surprised to see support shift again.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33532158]Obviously this is from 2009, but his cabinet hasn't changed that drastically: [img]http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/files/2009/11/obamacabinet2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I think they were asking for a source of some- huh. AJC. Regardless, they want a source, not a picture. A source that isn't FOX.

[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;33533588]I think they were asking for a source of some- huh. AJC. Regardless, they want a source, not a picture. A source that isn't FOX.[/QUOTE] Considering that FDR was incredibly high up on the list(and FOX [i]hates[/i] FDR), I would say it is more likely to be legitimate. Although I can't really say for certain.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;33533771]Considering that FDR was incredibly high up on the list(and FOX [i]hates[/i] FDR), I would say it is more likely to be legitimate. Although I can't really say for certain.[/QUOTE] It probably is accurate, but the private sector experience of cabinet members does not mean anything in regard to the success, intelligence, or integrity of those cabinet members

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33533805]It probably is accurate, but the private sector experience of cabinet members does not mean anything in regard to the success, intelligence, or integrity of those cabinet members[/QUOTE]It doesn't determine quality at all.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33532158]Obviously this is from 2009, but his cabinet hasn't changed that drastically: [img]http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/files/2009/11/obamacabinet2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Yeah that's very nice, I like charts, but I would prefer it be accompanied by actual information on what their past experience actually entailed

Look how high Harding is. That sure worked out for him didn't it. Having outside interests that are affected by your politics sure is a good thing!!!

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33533805]It probably is accurate, but the private sector experience of cabinet members does not mean anything in regard to the success, intelligence, or integrity of those cabinet members[/QUOTE] Well experience can be very beneficial. A scientist who has studied and worked on energy related problems might be a far better Secretary of Energy. However, experience entails a lot of things. A scientist who worked with NASA their entire career would technically have 0 private sector experience, but might still be qualified for a scientific job.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530365]that's only bad when a democrat does it[/QUOTE] You actually think Democrats are treated worse than Republicans in the media?

Ahem. My entire reaction to this entire article: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvdf5n-zI14[/media]

Hell I'd nominate him for a Darwin Award

[QUOTE=NoS4A2;33530297]With an education in political science and economics?[/QUOTE] Lol no he has a poly sci degree (basically a degree in manipulating people) and a law degree (degree in screwing people over). He doesn't know jack shit about economics, aside from what his inexperienced advisers tell him [editline]2nd December 2011[/editline] Not to mention that half his staff hvae ties to the banks that got us in the recession in the first place! (Geithner, Bernanke, Feldstein, etc.)