Topic: Lindsey Graham
Replies: 86   Last Post: Jun 3, 2015 11:04 PM by: TigerFace
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 86  

Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 8:46 PM

I believe he is from Central. Does anyone know if he is a Clemson man? If he is he'll get my vote in the primary.

No ... by his own admission, he was not

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 8:50 PM

smart enough to get into Clemson. So, he finished SCar.

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"When I was young, I was sure of many things; now there are only two things of which I am sure: one is, that I am a miserable sinner; and the other, that Christ is an all-sufficient Saviour. He is well-taught who learns these two lessons." -John Newton

he's a coot***

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 8:51 PM

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg

Re: Thanks. Eff him. Lol***

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 8:53 PM

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 8:51 PM

I think he started at Clemson, but transferred to SC. He also received his law degree cr

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 8:53 PM

Sorry. I accidentally hit send. He got his law degree from SC

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 8:59 PM

He did mention Clemson in his speech this morning. Could have been just covering all the bases like politicians do.

2020 purple level member

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:01 PM


Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:13 PM

So you are saying that he is not a mindless robot that tows the party line each and every time?

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:33 PM

Nope. I'm saying he is a Obama loving piece of shit.


Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:35 PM

Thanks for the clearing that up :)

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

LOL...That's all it takes to love Obama?***

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:29 PM

soooo...can I thumbs-down you & him????

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 11:11 PM

Or shall I find other threads for this....?

Yeah, NO!
stand for SOMETHING, or fall for everything....
yeah this does mean you ash-holes!!!

Re: soooo...can I thumbs-down you & him????

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:54 AM

Thumb me down all you want. I find my 100% irksome. I don't reside in SC so as far as him representing my interests from a state level the point is moot.

I'm a right centrist person so I find leaders who do not follow strict neo-con dogma of interest. However, in all honesty I can't tell you off the top of my head where he has gone against the grain ovet the past several years. But I like the fact that he doesn't seem to fear the orange man.

Am I uninformed at the moment? Heck yes. Glad I have some time. Am I a gun owner? Heck yes. Is all gun legislation the same? No.

But enjoying the TNET rhetoric all the same.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

They just want someone as dumb as them that votes the

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 10:43 AM

exact way they would (like Lee Bright). The far-right is a funny bunch.

Lindsey is not perfect, by any means, but he's not nearly as bad as the right-wing thinks...he has dared to vote with the "other side" nearly 20% of the time! Off with his head!

Many just hate him because they "think" he's gay.

Not saying I'm a Lindsey Graham fan but like this reply

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 6:36 AM

Congress is too much butt kissing to vote every way with one of two parties. Long due for at least a third party and I respect those who vote out of party some

Well now...that lib-tard is focking' done!!!

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 11:07 PM

But I already knew that...
thanks for the pertinent info though!

Not that I'm a conservative...LOL!!!

Message was edited by: jbthe1tiger99®

Single issue voters...ruining this country. IMO

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:40 AM

Voting to confirm an appointment does not equal support. HTH

You do know AG's have nothing to with writing laws....

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 7:21 PM

So your little graphic is just showing a lack of intelligence of how this country works


Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:28 PM

I hope he isnt.

That little elf needs to disappear.



Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:33 PM

People that vote based on college affiliation probably shouldn't be able to vote.


Posted: Jun 2, 2015 6:50 AM

I'd add, people who blindly support a political party to the

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:43 AM

list of "shouldn't be allowed to vote".

Could also add people who choose a college based on the football team (unless they are an athlete).

Graham is a RINO

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:44 PM

Vote a real Conservative like Cruz, Rubio or Paul.

2020 student level member

Re: Graham is a RINO

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:48 PM

he is NOT A RINO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! he is a democrat!! he voted for both those 2 idiots that obummer put on the Supreme Court!

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Re: Graham is a RINO

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:54 PM

Only votes Republican about 88% of the time, most dont study all of the things he votes on just 1 or 2 subjects..

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

RINO = Republican in name only

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:57 PM

which is a polite way to say a right-centrist.

Graham is still better than anybody with a (D) behind their name, yet I still think he doesn't represent the interests of SC at all.

We need a repeal of the 17th Amendment (Ending the direct election will stop guys like Graham from being continuously elected) [id est, the State Assembly would actually elect the US Senators].

Tim Scott represents the populous of SC more than Graham, but Graham is the lesser of two evils when it comes to R v. D.

Ergo, I believe it is imperative that the GOP nominate someone who is a Conservative. Someone, like Marco Rubio (Although I don't agree on his amnesty stance, but love his social program reform), Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Rick Sanatorum, #### even Scott Walker. The GOP need not nominate Jeb Bush or Graham.

I think a team of Rand Paul and Marco Rubio/Ted Cruz would be a great ticket for the Republicans (not sure how you arrange that ticket though).

2020 student level member

Republican does not equal conservative. You realize that

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:48 AM

Ronald Reagan would be run out of the party today for being a RINO? There are conservative Republicans, but that is not a requirement.

The tea-party (and Dems) created the lie that all Republicans are far-right conservatives.

Perhaps the Republican party is not all far right

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:06 AM

conservatives, but it's no lie that the the far right conservative extremists control the party and have made compromise a dirty word in the name of strict adherence to ideological dogma with little to no use for empirical evidence to the contrary.


Agreed mostly. The far-right "thinks" they run the show.

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:20 AM

Prime example is the last primary with Graham, Bright, Mace, et al. All these far-right candidates and they couldn't touch Lindsey. There's more regular Republicans out there than most realize, but they don't make for good message board fodder. They may actually take over the whole party, but I believe they will lose all support and become irrelevant by then.

BTW, I don't consider myself to be a Republican anymore (because of the far right) but I'm no Dem either. I dislike both sides equally!

I meant to add that the Dems have the same problem with

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:23 AM

the far-left. No compromise allowed.

The implication you are making that there is equal

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:38 AM

intransigence in both parties is simply not true.

If anything, President Obama has been too conciliatory towards the Republican party in an effort to find common ground when it was obvious(and publicly stated) that their chosen path was obstruction at every turn.


Nope. You are absolutely wrong about that. Obama

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 10:26 AM

has done everything he can to NOT play nice with the Repubs. He'll give them a little lip-service but almost everything he "does" is uber-partisian (Executive orders, anyone?). Even when he's supposed to be lifting up the country, he can't stop trashing the other side (see any of his SOTU speeches). His idea of "working together" is "I want to work together to get *insert issue* done, but if you don't do things exactly the way I want, I'll veto it." Of course, Reid does/did most of the Dem dirty work by not allowing debate/votes on anything. Neither side compromises (or even listens to the other) and I'm afraid that will be our downfall.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not an Obama/Dem hater, but they are no better than the Repubs. If you have any proof to the contrary, I would love to see it.

Just like people on the far-right don't seem to realize that they are a problem, people on the far-left are the same way.

I see talking points but not examples in your post.

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 11:40 AM

Perhaps you think it makes you look less partisan to pretend that it is an equal extremism.

A few examples:

Heritage Foundation developed Romneycare, which he implemented and Obama copied. Republicans decided to oppose it because they didn't want to give Obama a "victory."

Immigration reform was passed bi-partisan in the Senate. Not so in the hyper-partisan Republican house. Rubio, Walker, Christie and Bush and many Repubs all supported a path to citizenship previously. They have since flip flopped and now oppose a path to citizenship. Taxation without representation seems to be their desire. Not a conservative position.

Obama was ready to make a deal on entitlement reform, Boehner wanted it, but House Republicans were intransigent on any sort of tax increases as part of the compromise and killed it.

Obama re-nominates Republican Ben Bernanke to the post of Federal Reserve Chairman, who did a masterful job helping guide us through one of the worst recessions in our country's history.

Recent polling reveals that the public perception is of an intransigent republican party and a desire among Republican voters to avoid compromise even if it means getting nothing done. The Republican Party has a problem. It continues to move rightward in an attempt to lure a greater percentage of the older whites, blue-collar whites, married people and rural residents which are declining as a proportion of the electorate.


I don't have much time right now, but I will take a few min

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 12:44 PM

to respond. First, everything anyone says about any political issue can be called a "talking point", so whatever. I wasn't wanting to get into a long drawn out debate, so I was purposefully trying to keep my comment short. I had some idea that you were more reasonable and not a partisan, but I guess I was wrong...you just hate Repubs, which is fine except that I generally don't even bother to talk politics with "partisans".

Much of what you have listed is true, but I don't agree with some of what you say. Examples: Repubs opposed Obamacare for the individual mandate, not to deny a victory (though I'm sure that was part of it). It should be noted that Dems passed it anyway without any input from the R's, so your point also proves mine.

The immigration reform passed by the Senate was hardly "bi-partisian"...around 13-14 R's voted for it I believe (Graham was one of them). I agree that the House is very partisan (as is the Senate), however the "conservative position" (which I agree with in this case) is to simply follow the existing laws that are on the books. Kind of like the "equal pay for women" thing...there's already laws on the books, just enforce them. I agree that some of the R's are on the wrong side of the "path to citizenship" argument. Now since you brought up immigration, you have to acknowledge that Obama issuing executive orders that circumvent existing immigration laws and usurp Congressional power is just as bad. I am totally behind finding a way to give people an opportunity to either work toward citizenship or get out. Blanket amnesty can not work and we can not send everyone home...a "path" is the proper course of action.

If I'm remembering correctly, it was 2 things that derailed "entitlement reform": The Repubs insistence on no tax increases and the Dems insistence on increased Social Security benefits (see Elizabeth Warren and her "expand, not cut" SS). Politicians don't really care about entitlements except for the ability to buy votes. In this case I would say that both sides equally killed this: R's with "no tax increase", D's with "expand, not cut".

Bernanke should be fired. The Fed has turned the US into a nation of over-spenders with it's close-to-zero interest rates. If he was competent he would raise the interest rates to help push us toward a saving society. I'm sure the R's would protest and increase. If it was worded well, the D's would support it, IMO, because of the future benefit to the "middle class". Right now, no one saves anything. Does anyone even have a "savings account" anymore? Why do you think they want to increase SS benefits? We are not preparing for the future.

I agree that the perception is that it's all the Repubs fault that nothing gets done. The Dems have proven that they will do whatever they want anyway. Both sides are problematic. Both are right. Both are wrong.

You won't agree because you are invested in one side over the other...I'm not.


Raising social security benefits had nothing to do with

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 1:44 PM

the inability to enact entitlement reform. That was not an issue for Democrats. That is a straw man.

You may want to go back to the comments from Republicans in the early days of Obama when the leadership of the Republican Party vowed not to work with Obama on anything. You may recall after the 2012 elections, Boehner apologizing for trying to enact entitlement reform by negotiating with Obama and vowing to never do it again. He was hammered mercilessly for doing it.

When you talk economics, you are talking about one of my favorite topics. Your comments on Bernanke reflect a general lack of understanding of economics and how an economy works. It's not like a household. One man's spending is another man's income. The suggestion that higher interest rates is what the economy needed when the public was deleveraging was a recipe for a depression. That is another thing the Republicans either don't understand or are trying to mislead the public on. History will be very kind to Ben Bernanke for the excellent job he has done.

In order for higher interest rates to benefit you, you must have more interest bearing assets than debt. Which group of Americans has that? The richest one half of one percent (the upper .005%). In other words, the remaining 99.5% of Americans benefited from the lower interest rates as they tried to reduce their debt load. Another talking point that has no basis in fact.

I don't hate Republicans. Many of my family and friends are Republicans(I live in SC, one of the least politically diverse states in the country). I just prefer a pragmatic approach to governing based upon empirical evidence of what works and what does not as opposed to political and ideological dogma.

One of the problems you run into in a Southern state like SC is that the echo chamber of like minded extreme conservative individuals gives you a false right wing sense of the country's political landscape. I don't get the impression from your writings that you aren't one of them, regardless of your suggestions to the contrary.


Whatever. Dems are good. Repubs are bad. Got it.

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 2:55 PM

To clarify one thing: "entitlement reform" as presented never really had a chance. Obama was pushing and conservatives pushed back. It was looking like there would be a battle. Obama lost the will to fight after Warren and others started pushing for increases in SS and he dropped it, blaming the failure on the Repubs. I don't really think that's up for debate, though I'm sure you disagree. Oh, I believe Bernanke will end up being seen very negatively in a historic context...of course, I'm wrong and you're right.

Now the rest...

I've been in just as many arguments that I took the other side. If you want, we can switch sides and I can use all of your talking points. It doesn't matter to me since both sides are wrong half the time.

A forum like this is not a good way to debate anything like this. I tend to oversimplify my thoughts in an attempt to keep things short. Like my thoughts on Bernanke...I didn't want to get into an economic debate, but I oversimplify for brevity. I can debate different economic ideas with you, but it would be a waste of time. You do realize there are different economic theories, right? Oh, I forgot, you're right and I'm wrong.

You seem to think I'm one of "them", which I think is rather funny. I was simply on this thread to try and say that Lindsey isn't as bas as most on the right think...I support Lindsey and anyone else who tries to "cross the aisle". That really makes me conservative. You know how much the conservatives love Lindsey.

I am a man without a party, so to speak. I lean middle-right on fiscal issues and lean left on social issues. I think Dem fiscal ideas are just wrong much of the time and Repub social stances are downright embarrassing. I don't fit in with either party and I don't want to. Frankly, I think people who hang on a party label are fools.

Anyway, I think you are just as bad as the righties and I don't appreciate your condescending tone. I think you have a very narrow view of politics and are unwilling (or unable) to look at things from a different perspective. I realize you probably think the same thing of me. It is a waste of my time (and yours) to bother talking with you...it's as bad as trying to deal with a right-winger. Besides, this is the "football" board.

Until people stop looking at US politics as us vs. them and through the lens of political parties, we are in trouble. Believe what you want.

That's about all I have to say. I won't respond any more.


Re: Whatever. Dems are good. Repubs are bad. Got it.

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 2:58 PM

I am a man without a party, so to speak. I lean middle-right on fiscal issues and lean left on social issues. I think Dem fiscal ideas are just wrong much of the time and Repub social stances are downright embarrassing. I don't fit in with either party and I don't want to. Frankly, I think people who hang on a party label are fools.

Anyway, I think you are just as bad as the righties and I don't appreciate your condescending tone. I think you have a very narrow view of politics and are unwilling (or unable) to look at things from a different perspective. I realize you probably think the same thing of me. It is a waste of my time (and yours) to bother talking with you...it's as bad as trying to deal with a right-winger. Besides, this is the "football" board.

Until people stop looking at US politics as us vs. them and through the lens of political parties, we are in trouble. Believe what you want."

Bravo good sir Bravo. Nice post.



He made a good point, Noodle.

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 3:21 PM

South Carolinian Republicans live in the bubble. It is easy to feel like you are right about everything here in the Upstate because the right winginess is so loud. Here is a great example of how pathetic it is. My daughter had an awards night for her middle school last week and the night was filled with the normal thank you's and whatnot and all the parents clap like robots to every word said. The one administrator reads a beautiful message of hope and striving for the best and caps it off with, "Sincerely, your President Barack Obama". Not a word. Not a sound. Just an awkward as #### pause before one person tries a slow clap that is shut down by his wife and the program continued. These right wingers just can't put it aside for 5 minutes.

Re: He made a good point, Noodle.

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 3:24 PM

"these right wingers"

Good lord do you not hear yourself? You are just as bad as the people you are describing congrats.



They lean to the right and are darn

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 3:27 PM

tootin proud of it. What do you prefer PC Boy? Compassionate Conservatives? They are right wingers.

Re: They lean to the right and are darn

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 3:37 PM

### are you even babbling about?

You sounds worse than any right wing nut job congrats.



Why didn't you clap? Hmmm? Sounds made up to me.

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 3:55 PM

Of course I'm sure it "could" happen and probably does happen. The other side of the coin is examples like when Rutgers students got their panties in a wad because Condi Rice was slated to be their graduation speaker, forcing her to bail. Was that just as bad? Was it OK because everyone knows that Rice is evil?

Don't pretend that it's just a right-wing thing.

I am happy to have an honest discussion, but I put forth

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 4:41 PM

a number of points that the empirical evidence supports. I didn't make any outlandishly ideological or political claims. Yet, you say I am just "as bad as the righties" but offer nothing of substance to refute my claims or support yours.

The past 20 years(especially the last 8 or so) have provided much empirical evidence to test the different economic theories. Unfortunately, the supply-siders and their predictions of rampant inflation and a seriously devalued dollar have been proven wrong on all counts. Bernanke was right.

I think this thread offers an excellent example of how the Republican party has moved so far to the right. Lindsey Graham is being attacked by right wingers in this thread because(aside from the usual homophobic comments) he had the audacity to compromise with President Obama and the Democrats on a very small number of issues in an effort to govern, even though he votes Right 88% of the time.

Perhaps you aren't as stridently ideological as the GOP has become, but some of your positions seemed to fall in line with those of the GOP but aren't supported by the evidence. Sorry if you took it personally.


You are as bad as the right wingers because you are

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 5:46 PM

always right, obviously. No doubt. Anyone who says different is wrong. Bernanke is right, period. Obama wants to work with Repubs but those meanies won't, period. Southerners are crazy right wingers, period. It doesn't matter that there are opposing viewpoints, with their own evidence, they are wrong because I know how to use words like "empirical". It doesn't matter that supply-side does work, in spite of some bad predictions. I know people just like you, on both sides of the political spectrum, and I don't like any of them.

I didn't want to debate you. I still don't care to (can you tell?). I don't want to waste time looking up lots of research, etc. As soon as you said that Obama has tried too hard to play nice with the R's I knew you weren't worth debating...

ALL I was saying from the beginning is that there are crazy people on the far right AND left. You don't agree. It's just crazy on the right. I'm smack in the middle. I think your problem is that you "think" you're in the middle, but are really on the left. You think the same about me, obviously.

I was trying to be nice, even agreeing with you, keeping everything general and not trashing anyone's views. I don't care to try and convince a left-winger that they are wrong as it's just a waste of time. I do take offense to your air of superiority and condescending tone. I take offense to you putting all Southerners in the right-wing asshat category. Sorry, but you're a douchebag. What? I said "sorry"...

Some of my positions do fall within the realm of GOP thinking. Many of my positions fall within the realm of Dem thinking. Hell, I'm pro-gay marriage, pro-choice, and don't hate the "idea" of Obamacare...doesn't sound very Republican to me. I don't really get your point. I specifically said that I am not a Republican, yet you act like I'm a right-wing nutjob because some of my positions are also the GOP position? There are no "independent" positions...I will always be agreeing with "someone". So, F You.

I wasn't going to respond again, and I regret spending the time already.

Noodle out.

You may want to research your positions a bit before you

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 6:41 PM

take them. That seems to work better for most people. And, I would suggest you consider changing your positions should additional information come to light that may render your previous position untenable.

My point is that the republican party has moved dramatically to the right, for whatever reason, and has made debate of the issues difficult and compromise a dirty word, and is primarily responsible for the dysfunction in Washington. Your point was that it is equally the fault of Democrats. Judging from your reaction, I am right.


You might would be right, if I was a Repub. But since

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 7:03 PM

I'm not, well...

I don't get why you won't just admit that the Dems share in the blame for how messed up our government is. That was my only point.

As far as research goes, I don't keep all details on the tip of my tongue. I have other things to think about and don't really care much about politics, in spite of getting sucked into this thread. Rather that misspeak or use an incorrect number/statistic, I go back to my notes to verify the details. You are obviously of superior intellect and have a brain like a SSD and can remember every detail. I can't so I must go review. I don't have the time/desire to do that now.

We agree that the R party is moving farther to the right. You seem to think that the D party is in the middle...it's not, and it's moving farther left, IMO. The ultimate democrat, JFK, wouldn't be considered a D today. He'd be more of a centrist R, based on his economics.

You are an eloquent troll, I'll give you that, but you are a troll nonetheless.

Liberal, conservative, right wing, left wing, GOP, DEMS.....

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 6:50 PM

Wake up. While so many Americans get caught up in "who's team's winnin" political gamesmanship; the obvious is kicking everyone's arse. Literally Billions of dollars are "donated" to political candidates every election cycle. Those aren't donations, they're investments. They want something for the money they give and unfortunately, they invariably get it at the expense of the everyday American.

Money in politics has railroaded the Democratic process and YOU are the one that gets to pay for it:

How much is your health insurance both before and after ObamaCare. You know why it was and still remains high? Because the Insurance companies have a written exception to the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. They get to collude and fix prices without restraint. A free market system is supposed to promote competition right? Well, because of the money Ins. Co's have put into the system they no longer have to compete. Try to buy health insurance across state lines? Nope, you can't. The market is fixed.

How much is your powerbill? The Utility lobby has made sure that the market is carved up into monopoly segments. Don't like how much your paying? To bad, they're the only game in town.

Don't like your cable bill? Too bad, you have 1 choice. Pay it.

Don't like your hospital bill? Too bad, pay it. The vast majority of hospitals in the U.S. are owned and controlled by hospital corporations who's PRIMARY objective is profits. 65% of all American bankruptcy's are as a result of hospital bills. The hospital lobby spends over $80 MILLION per year in lobbying and pollitical contributions.

Don't like how much your Medicine cost? Pharmaceutical companies have spent over $180 MILLION per year since 2006 in lobbying and political contributions.

Don't like your cable bill? Too bad, pay it. It's a monopoly.

Don't like your internet bill? Too bad, pay it.

The list goes on and on and on.

Corporations have the same legal standing under the law as humans do, except for one notable exception. Corporations can sue the federal government....and you can't.

Until the constitution is modified to read that only human beings can contribute in to politicians then you will continue to be harvested. It doesn't really matter WHO OR WHICH candidate or party gets elected.

Sorry for the interuption, you were saying something about conservatives, or liberals...or some other nonsense that has very little to do with the future of our democracy????.....

2020 orange level member

Felix2 is wise. I don't know how I got sucked into this.***

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 7:05 PM

Re: Graham is a RINO

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:57 PM

Or Sc

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Go Tigers! Once A Tiger Always A Tiger

Re: Graham is a RINO

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:57 PM


2020 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Go Tigers! Once A Tiger Always A Tiger

Re: Graham is a RINO

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:57 PM

#### n

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Go Tigers! Once A Tiger Always A Tiger

You South Carolinians should be embarassed by this guy

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:55 PM

He attacked Rand for fighting against the illegal spying. He's almost always wrong on foreign policy. He and Jeb are awful.

Thank god!****

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 11:10 PM

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:55 PM

He want get my vote.

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:01 PM

I hope he "want"....



Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 9:56 PM

He is an idiot. Check his voting record before getting behind him

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Go Tigers! Once A Tiger Always A Tiger

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:48 PM

Yeah, he is conservative except for when he "compromises" and he seems to "compromise" about half the time he votes.

I don't care!!!!!!

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:48 PM

I don't care if Linsey Graham was the greatest Clemson FB player ever, it could not offset the amount of ###### baggery. I'm more of a libertarian than anything but typically vote Republican, but this MOTHERFATHER is a piece of Larry Shyatt! Thankfully I don't liev in SC anymore and my Ga. Senators have serious faults, too. But Lindsey Graham are you kidding me! The citizens of SC have failed their fellow state residents allowing him to put his butt in the Senate. Oh, my GOD! If the pool of candidates in SC is so low that he is the best man for the job, then the state is beyond hopeless because the people are morons. Likewise, If he where to be considered a legit candidate for POTUS, along with the entire field on both sides of the aisle, we will soon fade into history. If this moronic clown were to somehow weasel his way into the White House, let it begin. As much as I hate both parties and the only one on either side I would not vote for over him, is Bernie Sanders. As much as I really can't stand the heinous witch that is Hillary Clinton, I would honestly check the box for her over Graham. He is a pansie, weasel with 9 brain cells. And there is no doubt that at some point he has serviced other men for pleasure. God, we're in trouble. Much like Job, I wish to be taken out of my misery.


Re: I don't care!!!!!!

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:53 PM

He gave up his will to fight years ago. All he does is take the easy path and in the process try to score some sound bytes to make him appear extremely pro military.

It's not "easy" going against his party...I think you have

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:51 AM

it backward. He takes so much heat from the far-right, it would be much easier to be a good soldier and vote with all the other R's. Just sayin'.

Repeal the 17th Amendment

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 10:58 PM

The Assembly would never elect him.

2020 student level member

Re: I don't care!!!!!!

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 7:05 AM

I get frustrated at politics too, but I definitely do not agree with your assessment of Lindsey. He is trying to be a statesman in a political climate that no longer has statesmen. He has crossed the aisle to work with others but I have known Lindsey for almost his whole life and I will never believe your allegations of his sexual life. I disagree with his premise that elections have consequences so he was willing to vote in favor of some of Obama's choices for Supreme Court and I have talked to him about that. If you knew Lindsey you would not necessarily vote for him but you would definitely have a less harsh opinion of him. I have no problem with you thinking he is not a good candidate and so don't vote for him, but Sanders and Hillary is a far worse vote in my opinion.

Hillary will win. Tigernet will cry or

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 7:36 AM

maybe boo her during halftime military inductions. Ya know, keep it classy in the name of that there Constitution! Mitt Romney was the GOP's best hope. The rest of these guys are climbing out of the same right wing crazy clown car saying the same social stuff and of course on the economic side, help for the most vulnerable has to be cut while the "job creators" get the breaks. And I don't think Jeb can survive the stench his brother still has lingering around this country.....all of those clowns are only going to be able to mention Benghazi and emails so many times.

Re: Hillary will win. Tigernet will cry or

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:32 AM

mother of god...



Totally agree with this. He tries to be a leader, but the

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:54 AM

far right won't follow. Some of us in the center appreciate his efforts to get something done.

"no doubt he serviced other men"...do tell. You seem to

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 10:36 AM

"know" about his sexual preference. Was it good for you?

I'm curious why you hate Lindsey so much. Did he not call you back after your date? Do you just hate him because you "know" he's gay? I can recommend a good therapist to help you deal with your latent homosexuality.

BTW, Libertarians are hypocrites.

Have a nice day!

Hey Lumbee!

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 11:39 PM

This thread pretty much proves my point. :)


Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 1, 2015 11:41 PM

He is not a true conservative!!! Therefore, I will not vote for him!

Gotta vote for him, we need a woman in the White House.***

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:26 AM

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

The majority of South Carolinians opposed ole Lindsey, yet he still got

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:35 AM

Voted in by a landslide. For every 1 person that supported him I could easily show you 5-10 that didn't. Where do these votes come from?

You may need to expand your social circle. He has

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:00 AM

a lot of support in SC. Now, if I know I'm talking to a far-right conservative, I don't generally say anything about Lindsey because it will turn into a fight.

Another reason is that many Dems vote for Lindsey because he will at least try to be non-partisan. They don't like him, but he's not a Lee Bright either.

He had too many opponents in the primary

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 10:43 AM

if it had just been 1 or 2 he might have lost. There was no way he'd lose the general election because people in this state vote based on the party, not the name.

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:00 AM

I would not vote for Lindsey if his last name was Clemson.

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:26 AM

I hear he likes "Doing da butt"


For relaxing times, make it Suntory time

Hes a RINO

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:44 AM

Vote his *** out!

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 9:46 AM

I sure hope you were joking about voting for him just because of college affiliation. Even if it's just the primary and you don't care about who wins the Republican primary, that can still affect the presidential race.

Call him Lindsey, oh wait....***

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 10:37 AM

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 10:41 AM

That's how I'd smile after a stay @ the Hanoi Hilton.***

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 10:46 AM

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 12:30 PM

he is a charter member of the HAPPY club!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tell 'em leadcoot

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 2:35 PM


Lindsey Graham is an embarrassment***

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 4:43 PM

2020 student level member

A Russian fly-by 100 meters from a US Destroyer is

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 6:52 PM

embarrassing. Most importantly, it is profoundly dangerous.

Re: Lindsey Graham

Posted: Jun 2, 2015 8:13 PM

Doesn't really matter. Hillary wins in 2016 because most voters are just that idiotic and misinformed.(And those Dems who could beat her in the primary will prolly mysteriously die in plane crashes or disappear, along with the GOP not being able put forth a candidate worth voting for.)

She'll get the "we need a woman president" vote "just because."

Nothing surprises me anymore after 2008. We had a guy telling us what he was gonna do to us, and he STILL got elected. Twice. LMAO!

One more thing:

Those people who voted for Obama and are complaining about insurance.....STFU and enjoy.

2020 purple level member

Odd, because I kept telling myself

Posted: Jun 3, 2015 11:04 PM

no way the American people are dumb enough to vote Bush in a second term, and they were. I am not sure how you felt about that lapse in judgement. For a lot of people, including myself, it was game over for McCain the moment Palin stepped on stage. That further secured the election for Obama.

I have one question on this.

Posted: Jun 3, 2015 12:00 AM

Why isn't this posted in the Amphitheater?


Replies: 86  


FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: For Sale: four seats in Section K row I and row J seats are back to back on the two rows. One set is...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
7056 people have read this post