Skip to main content

Running for the future president, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker doesn't want to talk about the future...

It's quite ironic that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is running to become president in 2017 yet seems to be unwilling to answer questions about the future. Yes, 2017 is in the future.

When speaking with ABC News and being asked how he'd respond to the Syrian refugee situation if he were the president, Walker responded with this:

"I'm not president today and I can't be president today. Everybody wants to talk about hypotheticals; there is no such thing as a hypothetical."

I'm sorry to disappoint Mr. Walker, but these questions kind of come with the territory of running for the highest office in the land. Yes, he'll be asked about previous comments he's made, his voting record, bills he's passed and vetoed, how he differs from the 432 other GOP candidates, and perhaps a few times when he's been caught flip-flopping. However, like all the other candidates, he's going to be asked about what he'd do if he became president - you know, hypotheticals. In other words, Scott, you're going to be asked about the past, present, and future. I know, crazy, right?

With this kind of mentality, it's going to be quite the task for Walker to convince people to vote for him.

Reporter: "What will you do if you become president to help improve this country?"

Scott Walker: "I'm not president today; I can't be president today. Everybody wants to talk about hypotheticals; there is no such thing as hypotheticals."

Reporter: "Okay... But let's just pretend for a second that you were elected president, what's the first thing you'd like to do once you step into office?"

Walker: "I told you, I'm not the president right now; I can't be the president right now. These are just hypotheticals and there's no such thing as hypotheticals!"

Reporter: "Why should people vote for you then?"

Walker: "I don't know; just because, I guess. I mean, I am Scott Walker. That should mean something, right?"

Reporter; "To some, I suppose. But try convincing the moderates, Independents, the voters sitting on the fence right now. Why should they vote for you? What will you do while in the Oval Office?"

Walker: "I am sick and tired of these hypotheticals! I told you, this is the third time actually, I am not the president! What the hell is wrong with you?"

Reporter: "I could ask you the same thing... Anyway, so you don't want to give any reasons for why people should vote for you? You don't want to provide any persuasive points to win over voters? None whatsoever, yet you are confident you'll win?"

Walker: "I didn't say that. I might not win. I have to be realistic about this. There are 16 other candidates."

Reporter: "Alright, so try to win then. Give the voters specific reasons why they should vote for you. Tell me, why should they vote for you? What will you do for them if you become President of the United States of America?"

Walker: "Look, I'm done here! That's the 4th time you've asked me about these stupid non-existent hypotheticals! There is no such thing as thinking ahead of time, of preparing for the worst, of being prepared for anything and everything! If God wants me to win, I'm going to win; if he doesn't, I won't. It's his call, not the voters'!"

What was that quote of yours again, Mr. Walker?

"I'm not president today and I can't be president today. Everybody wants to talk about hypotheticals; there is no such thing as a hypothetical."

There it is. My hypothesis? While Scott Walker is correct that he's not the president today and can't be the president today, he's also not going to be the president come 2017.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/scott-walker-wont-take-questions-about-past-or-future_55f0421fe4b093be51bce62f

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"