Trump Will Not Run.

[DinkinFlicka]

What I object to here is taking a policy position on a specific thing (Planned Parenthood) or abortion then leaping to an accusation of sexism.

It has a chilling effect on debate - these are serious accusations that end up in people being fired from jobs (with racism being the top of the heap).

We've gone from having policy differences to demonizing opponents.

I consider this to be a huge reason why the country is so divided. Instead of arguing ideals we label people and paint them with a broad, negative, nefarious brush.

For the record I don't think Obama is a socialist or homophobic. I just don't agree with his positions on many issues.

You have to just agree to disagree with me here. I hate the thought of electing candidates I dislike as people. I don't want ignorant pricks controlling the oval office. If you want to focus on fixing the PROBLEMS in this country, fine and good. If you want to manifest your backwoods agenda to the point of affecting what someone can do to their body, or whether they can marry someone they love, or simply get a job... that's when I stop taking you seriously and vote elsewhere.

Guys, I wanna respond to ya, but I'm posting from my phone's browser. I've gotta head into work. I'll hit this back later.

 

[JZVOL]

You have to just agree to disagree with me here. I hate the thought of electing candidates I dislike as people. I don't want ignorant pricks controlling the oval office. If you want to focus on fixing the PROBLEMS in this country, fine and good. If you want to manifest your backwoods agenda to the point of affecting what someone can do to their body, or whether they can marry someone they love, or simply get a job... that's when I stop taking you seriously and vote elsewhere.

Guys, I wanna respond to ya, but I'm posting from my phone's browser. I've gotta head into work. I'll hit this back later.

You are just so enlightened and so progressive!

 

[droski]

You have to just agree to disagree with me here. I hate the thought of electing candidates I dislike as people. I don't want ignorant pricks controlling the oval office. If you want to focus on fixing the PROBLEMS in this country, fine and good. If you want to manifest your backwoods agenda to the point of affecting what someone can do to their body, or whether they can marry someone they love, or simply get a job... that's when I stop taking you seriously and vote elsewhere.

Guys, I wanna respond to ya, but I'm posting from my phone's browser. I've gotta head into work. I'll hit this back later.

bush for all of his wackjob social views didn't really do anything to help that agenda.

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

Path is clearing for Daniels or maybe Christie to jump in.

Huck is out
Trump is out
Romney has no chance
If Daniels can make it through the primary he will have a great shot. Christie can make it through the primary but may not have as wide appeal (no pun intended).

Really? No Chance? I can see him winning it all

 

[MG1968]

Herman Cain: ?It?s Not Planned Parenthood -- No, It?s Planned Genocide? | CNSnews.com

That should clear things up.
I just stated that he's probably sexist and homophobic based on his social conservative (extra mile included) views. Bham disagreed, and we discussed it. No "bed-wetting hysteria" here, but let's say it for the sake of... well, saying it.

you do realize that the founder of Planned Parenthood was a proponent of eugenics and was about as racist a person as David Duke?

PP may provide many worthwhile services to poor and inner-city women, but they don't need or deserve to be funded by the taxpayer.

 

[n_huffhines]

Really? No Chance? I can see him winning it all

I doubt he can win, but it depends on who he is up against really. I just don't see the south widely supporting his nomination, which is probably necessary to win.

But honestly, what are we looking at:

Ron Paul
Chris Christie
Mitt Romney
Sarah Palin

I'd be happy as a clam with either Paul or Christie, but none of the 4 appear to be extremely electable.

 

[lawgator1]

you do realize that the founder of Planned Parenthood was a proponent of eugenics and was about as racist a person as David Duke?

Assuming your characterization is correct, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

 

[droski]

Assuming your characterization is correct, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

if you found out david duke's ice cream shop (or something else you don't have a political problem with) was receiving federal funds you wouldn't have a problem with it?

 

[lawgator1]

I doubt he can win, but it depends on who he is up against really. I just don't see the south widely supporting his nomination, which is probably necessary to win.

But honestly, what are we looking at:

Ron Paul
Chris Christie
Mitt Romney
Sarah Palin

I'd be happy as a clam with either Paul or Christie, but none of the 4 appear to be extremely electable.

Paul can't win the nomination, much less the general.

Christie I don't think has any intention of running.

Palin has faded faster than cheap paint. She's not a serious candidate.

Sure seems like Romney has the catbird's seat.

To be honest -- and this has nothing to do with politics -- I just find the guy really, really, boring.

 

[lawgator1]

if you found out david duke's ice cream shop (or something else you don't have a political problem with) was receiving federal funds you wouldn't have a problem with it?

Depends on the time frame (and otherwise, no, I'd not be a fan of giving an ice cream shop federal funds -- but I get what you mean).

Is this fellow dead?

 

[n_huffhines]

Paul can't win the nomination, much less the general.

Christie I don't think has any intention of running.

Palin has faded faster than cheap paint. She's not a serious candidate.

Sure seems like Romney has the catbird's seat.

To be honest -- and this has nothing to do with politics -- I just find the guy really, really, boring.

Why do you think Paul doesn't have a chance? He accomplished a lot more than anybody expected of him last go-round and it seems A LOT more are open to him now. Winning straw polls and such, his popularity is soaring. I mean, I don't expect him to win, but I wouldn't say "he can't win".

 

[droski]

Depends on the time frame (and otherwise, no, I'd not be a fan of giving an ice cream shop federal funds -- but I get what you mean).

Is this fellow dead?

she's long dead, but i think it's relavant to mention her motives when arguing that planned parenthood is some sort of savior of the inner city.

 

[MG1968]

Assuming your characterization is correct, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

google "Margaret Sanger"

'Flicka is calling Herman Cain's criticism of PP "racist", or at least racially motivated (ridiculous in and of itself), however, PP's founder, Margaret Sanger was a proponent of eugenics and looked at black people as inferior. It's no secret that there are a lot of black women having abortions. Is it really that much of a stretch to consider what PP is going "genocidal".

 

[lawgator1]

Why do you think Paul doesn't have a chance? He accomplished a lot more than anybody expected of him last go-round and it seems A LOT more are open to him now. Winning straw polls and such, his popularity is soaring. I mean, I don't expect him to win, but I wouldn't say "he can't win".

No, he really can't. He's capped out. The people rallying around him are the max he can get. To win, you've got to be able to win over enough undecideds (in both your own primary and general) to get past your own base.

Paul has an enthusiastic base, but no meaningful opportunity to grow that base.

she's long dead, but i think it's relavant to mention her motives when arguing that planned parenthood is some sort of savior of the inner city.

Meh, that's just really stupid. I mean, you can probably find a bunch of stuff about someone or someones in the founding of just about every organization that gets some public funding, in whole or in part. Bad argument.

 

[lawgator1]

google "Margaret Sanger"

'Flicka is calling Herman Cain's criticism of PP "racist", or at least racially motivated (ridiculous in and of itself), however, PP's founder, Margaret Sanger was a proponent of eugenics and looked at black people as inferior. It's no secret that there are a lot of black women having abortions. Is it really that much of a stretch to consider what PP is going "genocidal".

Not defending anything or anyone in this thread.

Just think going back to something pretty clearly irrelevant for any current purpose is a pretty thin basis for making policy now.

 

[volinbham]

google "Margaret Sanger"

'Flicka is calling Herman Cain's criticism of PP "racist", or at least racially motivated (ridiculous in and of itself), however, PP's founder, Margaret Sanger was a proponent of eugenics and looked at black people as inferior. It's no secret that there are a lot of black women having abortions. Is it really that much of a stretch to consider what PP is going "genocidal".

I thought he was saying Cain is sexist for his comments on PP.

Either way I think he's wrong - I see nothing sexist nor racist about the Cain comments DnF posted.

 

[droski]

Meh, that's just really stupid. I mean, you can probably find a bunch of stuff about someone or someones in the founding of just about every organization that gets some public funding, in whole or in part. Bad argument.

i'm going to go out on a limb and assume that if this was a conservative organization with racist founders that you would not feel the same way.

 

[volinbham]

i'm going to go out on a limb and assume that if this was a conservative organization with racist founders that you would not feel the same way.

Regardless, what's crazy is how Cain is the one who's in the wrong here (apparently) for even bringing up Sanger. In some bizarro world that makes him racist or sexist or both (still not sure).

Even if you don't connect current to past how this makes Cain the bad guy is beyond me other than the fact you don't like him because he's ant-abortion.

 

[VolsByNature]

Considering he is an embarrasment to Republicans around the nation, congrats Republicans

Just an 411: I'm neither. I like Cain for the Rep. party. No it's not 'cause he's black

 

[lawgator1]

i'm going to go out on a limb and assume that if this was a conservative organization with racist founders that you would not feel the same way.

If it still promoted racist views? Sure.

But I wouldn't hold an organization that is markedly different from those concepts responsible for something a founder said in 1932 if it isn't their purpose now.

I mean, by that logic, the Supreme Court should immediately be disbanded. And probably the Congress and the Chief Executive, too. Not to mention the military.

 

[lawgator1]

Regardless, what's crazy is how Cain is the one who's in the wrong here (apparently) for even bringing up Sanger. In some bizarro world that makes him racist or sexist or both (still not sure).

Even if you don't connect current to past how this makes Cain the bad guy is beyond me other than the fact you don't like him because he's ant-abortion.

Cain is an interesting cat. But do you really think he can win the GOP nomination? Seems like a stretch.

 

[droski]

If it still promoted racist views? Sure.

But I wouldn't hold an organization that is markedly different from those concepts responsible for something a founder said in 1932 if it isn't their purpose now.

I mean, by that logic, the Supreme Court should immediately be disbanded. And probably the Congress and the Chief Executive, too. Not to mention the military.

i'm not saying it shouldn't be funded because of the founder, only that this argument that the republicans are bunch of racists or sexists because they want to get rid of planned parenthood funding doesn't hold water.

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

People vote with their wallets, and by 2012, they wont care about PP or if Romney drinks soda.

Housing values will continue to slide, the jobs market will contine to suck, oil prices will rise again. Romney gets the GOP nomination because he will run on a jobs creation platform and I think wins the POTUS

How is Obama going to bash Romney? He cant. Obama cant talk about Romney failed MA HC plan, because his own plan is a failure. Obama cant bash Romneys background because "thats racist". So ultimately the race comes down to Jobs. Romney was a CEO of a successful company, while Obama is showing zero ability to promote jobs growth

 

[CSVol]

People vote with their wallets, and by 2012, they wont care about PP or if Romney drinks soda.

Housing values will continue to slide, the jobs market will contine to suck, oil prices will rise again. Romney gets the GOP nomination because he will run on a jobs creation platform and I think wins the POTUS

How is Obama going to bash Romney? He cant. Obama cant talk about Romney failed MA HC plan, because his own plan is a failure. Obama cant bash Romneys background because "thats racist". So ultimately the race comes down to Jobs. Romney was a CEO of a successful company, while Obama is showing zero ability to promote jobs growth

I agree that the economy will be the focus. But how will the right spin 180 and support Romney after trashing Obamacare for 4 years?

 

[lawgator1]

i'm not saying it shouldn't be funded because of the founder, only that this argument that the republicans are bunch of racists or sexists because they want to get rid of planned parenthood funding doesn't hold water.

Oh, okay. I agree with the racism thing 100 percent. The sexism notion I think a valid argument can be made that the choice aspect of the issue has some bearing on women's rights. But that is from the perspective of the pro-choice crowd, so I don't view being anti-abortion as being motivated by being anti-woman, or anti-woman's free choice. The pro-choice crowd may feel it has that effect (i.e. reduces the power a woman has), but in terms of motive, I agree with you.