2016 Presidential Horse Race

[zelezo vlk]

I don't like dismissing the "Wrong Side of History" argument so flippantly. I think it applies to the abortion issue more than it's ever applied to anything.

Maybe, but I'd rather argue from natural law. Also, if at all possible I'd rather not give credit to an argument that the left uses to belittle those who are opposed to unfettered progressivism.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I don't like dismissing the "Wrong Side of History" argument so flippantly. I think it applies to the abortion issue more than it's ever applied to anything.

I wasn't dismissing it. Just wondering why Eddy is concern trolling when we all know exactly what he thinks of his political opponents on this board.

The Wrong Side of History concept is obviously rooted in Christian eschatology, so I'm somewhat sympathetic to it; just not how Progressives selectively employ it. For instance, both the slave-holding eugenicists of antebellum America and the Nazi eugenicists of early 20th century Europe have definitely been resigned to the "historical dust bin"; and yet Progressives still embrace eugenicism against the unborn, the old, and the ill. A woman received a standing ovation for stating that she'd killed her unborn child at the DNC.

How many of your grandparents held politically correct views toward racial and sexual minorities? Would you publicly denounce them with the same self-righteous fury you're currently slandering your political opponents? Remarkably little mercy or sympathy for such people, especially when there's an excellent chance that your own grandchildren will look back on your support for abortion and euthanasia with similar disgust.

 

[dshans]

Hillary got a bump from her speech last night. In the I.E. Poll she's opened up a substantial lead over Gary Johnson for second place.

Judging from accuracy of the last I.E. presidential election poll ... I take great comfort.

 

[dshans]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yPbUhcvDgCo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Just another nutso, right wing "evil is as evil does" spin to deflect, obfuscate, generate hate and conflate.

He was clearly and simply rapt and meditative.

 

[connor_in]

Just another nutso, right wing "evil is as evil does" spin to deflect, obfuscate, generate hate and conflate.

He was clearly and simply rapt and meditative.

if you liked that one, you'll love this one...

 

[NDinL.A.]

The truth is the GOP could be running a Carson/Rubio ticket right now and two things would still happen - the white male vote would tilt in favor the of the GOP and the left would still accuse the GOP of not being "inclusive".

The problem is, many Republicans (myself included, until I recently became an independent) and independents feel that way now. When your own party feels that way, that's just not good. And when it clearly shows in the polls and the RNC, even worse.

Even if Trump wins (very possible), is that good for conservatives or the Republican Party? Nominating a person so non-inclusive, so vile and full of hate/spite/ego? What happens in 4 years (God-forbid 8, possibly less than 2 after impeachment), when the Republicans don't have a such a force of personality on the ticket that grabs the new voters Trump got, and they can't grab the voters they lost? They are done.

I left the party and I doubt I'll ever go back. I won't be a Democrat, but I tell you what (and this is nuts coming from a guy who has never voted for a Democratic presidential candidate) - I watched both conventions in their entirety and I identified with the DNC's message MUCH more more than than the RNC's shit-show. Not everything of course, but a lot of it. That has never happened before. As angry as I seem in this thread LOL, angry and screaming at the world speeches just don't resonate with me.

The crazy thing is, Trump isn't even a true conservative, and privately I guarantee you he disagrees with most of the right's social policies (gay rights, abortion, transgender restrooms, etc), but the RNC's platform was the most conservative I've ever seen...and some of it was just not for me either. Conversion therapy for gays and lesbians? Really? So you have a not-so-conservative maniac/demagogue on the top of the ticket, running an ultra-conservative platform with an ultra-conservative as his running mate. Fascinating.

 

[wizards8507]

Conversion therapy for gays and lesbians? Really?

Is that in the platform for real?

 

[IrishLax]

Not much difference other than George W. making an effort to gain the support of Hispanics. After Romney lost, I thought the Republicans had learned that it would take a perfect storm for them to win a national election unless they widened their base of support by toning down their rhetoric. You can't offend every group except white males and hope to be a viable party in the future. Like it or not, these other groups are increasing not only their percentage of the population as a whole, but also their willingness to be participants in the process.

It really doesn't get more stupid than this. We need to amend the IE Constitution* to make being stupid against the rules.

First of all, Hillary would get obliterated by Kasich/Rubio.

Second of all, go compare rhetoric between DNC and RNC. It's an absolute fucking joke that you would say what you just said. The DNC just spent an entire convention devoted to race baiting, calling Republicans enemies, and preaching hate towards white people/cops/anyone not in line with their PC views.

*I don't think that's a real thing.

 

[Bishop2b5]

FactChecking Clinton’s Big Speech

Color me shocked. Hillary was somewhat less than honest in her speech.

 

[RDU Irish]

The problem is, many Republicans (myself included, until I recently became an independent) and independents feel that way now. When your own party feels that way, that's just not good. And when it clearly shows in the polls and the RNC, even worse.

Even if Trump wins (very possible), is that good for conservatives or the Republican Party? Nominating a person so non-inclusive, so vile and full of hate/spite/ego? What happens in 4 years (God-forbid 8, possibly less than 2 after impeachment), when the Republicans don't have a such a force of personality on the ticket that grabs the new voters Trump got, and they can't grab the voters they lost? They are done.

I left the party and I doubt I'll ever go back. I won't be a Democrat, but I tell you what (and this is nuts coming from a guy who has never voted for a Democratic presidential candidate) - I watched both conventions in their entirety and I identified with the DNC's message MUCH more more than than the RNC's shit-show. Not everything of course, but a lot of it. That has never happened before. As angry as I seem in this thread LOL, angry and screaming at the world speeches just don't resonate with me.

The crazy thing is, Trump isn't even a true conservative, and privately I guarantee you he disagrees with most of the right's social policies (gay rights, abortion, transgender restrooms, etc), but the RNC's platform was the most conservative I've ever seen...and some of it was just not for me either. Conversion therapy for gays and lesbians? Really? So you have a not-so-conservative maniac/demagogue on the top of the ticket, running an ultra-conservative platform with an ultra-conservative as his running mate. Fascinating.

Agree with a lot of what you are saying. Except for the social issues I agree with most of the R platform - I have a tendency to ignore style and listen to substance. I do not doubt Trump has abortion pretty low on his priority list and probably couldn't care less about LGBTQ bathroom habits. Two things that hold Rs back in the independent space he is more moderate than their platform for sure.

That being said - Republican inability to differentiate between legality and morality drives me nuts. The refusal to get serious about reducing the size and scope of the federal government as well as unfunded mandates thrust on states and businesses, ditto.

As such - I am not really seeing the downside of the party getting turned on its ear. The assumption that Dems will take over the world and the principles and convictions of their constituency will morph into abortion loving, nanny staters is pretty ridiculous.

 

[dshans]

if you liked that one, you'll love this one...

Perhaps this was one of the rare occasions where I should have bent my personal rule against the use of italics to denote sarcasm.

I will vote for HRC since there are no remotely palatable or electable alternatives.

I don't recall voting for Bill, though I may have – at least in his first go-round.

He talked but walked with a very halting gait.

My voting history is probably longer than the number of years most you have been alive.

I'll spare you the gory details.

I reserve the right, however, to shower you with occasional enlightening dribs and drabs.

 

[woolybug25]

FactChecking Clinton’s Big Speech

Color me shocked. Hillary was somewhat less than honest in her speech.

You do realize that site fact checks every speech, right?

Your must have missed your boy's speech. A doozy.

FactChecking Trump’s Big Speech

 

[woolybug25]

Is that in the platform for real?

I doubt Trump himself would advocate for it, but it's certainly Pence's view.

When asked about the claim, Newsom’s spokesman pointed to Pence’s own words. During his first successful run for Congress in 2000, Pence wrote on his campaign website, under a section called Strengthening the American Family:

"Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior."

Also on the website, Pence wrote: "Congress should oppose any effort to put gay and lesbian relationships on an equal legal status with heterosexual marriage." And "Congress should oppose any effort to recognize homosexual’s [sic] as a "discreet and insular minority" entitled to the protection of anti-discrimination laws similar to those extended to women and ethnic minorities."

Our research found no evidence Pence has walked back his stance on public funding for conversion therapy. His spokesman did not respond with information about Pence’s current position.

TRUE: Mike Pence advocated for 'conversion therapy' | PolitiFact California

 

[connor_in]

Perhaps this was one of the rare occasions where I should have bent my personal rule against the use of italics to denote sarcasm.

I will vote for HRC since there are no remotely palatable or electable alternatives.

I don't recall voting for Bill, though I may have – at least in his first go-round.

He talked but walked with a very halting gait.

My voting history is probably longer than the number of years most you have been alive.

I'll spare you the gory details.

I reserve the right, however, to shower you with occasional enlightening dribs and drabs.

I got the sarcasm even without the italics...maybe I should have used them as well

 

[RDU Irish]

It would be awesome if we all had a moratorium on using the reasoning of "yeah, but what about [\insert other candidate]" as a basis of our arguments.

Probably could never happen, but a girl can dream.

LOL!!!

 

[RDU Irish]

You do realize that site fact checks every speech, right?

Your must have missed your boy's speech. A doozy.

FactChecking Trump’s Big Speech

RE: the LOL above

 

[woolybug25]

RE: the LOL above

You must have missed the conversation about how that would be impossible. If you can't beat em', join em'...

 

[EddytoNow]

It really doesn't get more stupid than this. We need to amend the IE Constitution* to make being stupid against the rules.

First of all, Hillary would get obliterated by Kasich/Rubio.

Second of all, go compare rhetoric between DNC and RNC. It's an absolute fucking joke that you would say what you just said. The DNC just spent an entire convention devoted to race baiting, calling Republicans enemies, and preaching hate towards white people/cops/anyone not in line with their PC views.

*I don't think that's a real thing.

When you have no answer, you resort to name calling, not the first time you've done that. I said it would take the perfect storm for Republicans to win a national election unless they became more inclusive. Well, Hillary Clinton is your perfect storm. If Biden, Sanders, or any other Democrat was running against Trump, the election would be all over. The Democrats choice of Clinton has given you the perfect storm.

If you can get past your Tea Party members and nominate a more inclusive candidate, then there is hope for the Republican Party in the future. Your two most moderate candidates, Kasich and Rubio, didn't have a chance in your own primary. You can call my comments stupid, but your base is shrinking with each election. You can make room for others in your party or you can go the way of the Whigs.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I doubt Trump himself would advocate for it, but it's certainly Pence's view.

TRUE: Mike Pence advocated for 'conversion therapy' | PolitiFact California

I despise Pence, but advocating for "assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior" does not equate to support for conversion therapy.

 

[NorthDakota]

you can't beat em', join em'...

PM me details as to where I can send you your Make America Great Again hat.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I doubt Trump himself would advocate for it, but it's certainly Pence's view.



TRUE: Mike Pence advocated for 'conversion therapy' | PolitiFact California

Here's the section of the platform that would nod to "conversion therapy."

Protecting Individual Conscience
in Healthcare
America’s healthcare professionals should not
be forced to choose between following their faith
and practicing their profession. We respect the
rights of conscience of healthcare professionals,
doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and organizations,
especially the faith-based groups which provide
a major portion of care for the nation and the
needy. We support the ability of all organizations to
provide, purchase, or enroll in healthcare coverage
consistent with their religious, moral, or ethical
convictions without discrimination or penalty.
We support the right of parents to determine the
proper medical treatment and therapy for their
minor children. We support the right of parents
to consent to medical treatment for their minor
children and urge enactment of legislation that
would require parental consent for their daughter
to be transported across state lines for abortion.
Providers should not be permitted to unilaterally
withhold services because a patient’s life is deemed
not worth living. American taxpayers should not be
forced to fund abortion. As Democrats abandon
this four decade-old bipartisan consensus, we
call for codification of the Hyde Amendment and
its application across the government, including
Obamacare. We call for a permanent ban on federal
funding and subsidies for abortion and healthcare
plans that include abortion coverage.

 

[wizards8507]

I despise Pence, but advocating for "assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior" does not equate to support for conversion therapy.

I'm still very unfamiliar with him. Do you have a recommended article that might serve as a proxy of your opinion?

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I despise Pence, but advocating for "assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior" does not equate to support for conversion therapy.

Interesting. I think that wording is pretty clearly intended to be supportive of conversion therapy without actually saying the words "conversion therapy."

 

[Wild Bill]

The problem is, many Republicans (myself included, until I recently became an independent) and independents feel that way now. When your own party feels that way, that's just not good. And when it clearly shows in the polls and the RNC, even worse.

Even if Trump wins (very possible), is that good for conservatives or the Republican Party? Nominating a person so non-inclusive, so vile and full of hate/spite/ego? What happens in 4 years (God-forbid 8, possibly less than 2 after impeachment), when the Republicans don't have a such a force of personality on the ticket that grabs the new voters Trump got, and they can't grab the voters they lost? They are done.

I left the party and I doubt I'll ever go back. I won't be a Democrat, but I tell you what (and this is nuts coming from a guy who has never voted for a Democratic presidential candidate) - I watched both conventions in their entirety and I identified with the DNC's message MUCH more more than than the RNC's shit-show. Not everything of course, but a lot of it. That has never happened before. As angry as I seem in this thread LOL, angry and screaming at the world speeches just don't resonate with me.

The crazy thing is, Trump isn't even a true conservative, and privately I guarantee you he disagrees with most of the right's social policies (gay rights, abortion, transgender restrooms, etc), but the RNC's platform was the most conservative I've ever seen...and some of it was just not for me either. Conversion therapy for gays and lesbians? Really? So you have a not-so-conservative maniac/demagogue on the top of the ticket, running an ultra-conservative platform with an ultra-conservative as his running mate. Fascinating.

I understand he's alienated some conservative voters but my underlying point is that dems have been playing the identity politics game for as long as I can remember and they're winning. They're going to continue to play the game regardless of what the GOP does.

Just look at the demographic breakdown of voting in 2012:
Whites favored Romney 59-39
Blacks favored Obama 93-6
Hispanics favored Obama 71-27

The numbers suggest whites are much more wiling to vote D than blacks or hispanics are willing to vote R yet we're sitting here discussing the racial implications of Trump increasing the R share of white votes by a couple percent. That just strikes me as bizarre.

 

[GoIrish41]

I despise Pence, but advocating for "assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior" does not equate to support for conversion therapy.

So they'd be cool with helping Bruce Jenner change his behavior and become Caytlin Jenner? Or a straight man to become gay? Will they provide assistance for those who do not conform to their view of normal? If not, it seems like a less course way of describing conversion therapy.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Here's the section of the platform that would nod to "conversion therapy."

Help me out here, Jayhawk. How does is that even a "nod" to conversion therapy? States have every right to outlaw that psuedo-scientific bullsh!t, but I whole-heartedly endorse the principle that parents should have broad discretion in controlling the medical care their children receive.

 

[wizards8507]

Help me out here, Jayhawk. How does is that even a "nod" to conversion therapy? States have every right to outlaw that psuedo-scientific bullsh!t, but I whole-heartedly endorse the principle that parents should have broad discretion in controlling the medical care their children receive.

Government funding doesn't scream "parental discretion" to me.

 

[woolybug25]

Help me out here, Jayhawk. How does is that even a "nod" to conversion therapy? States have every right to outlaw that psuedo-scientific bullsh!t, but I whole-heartedly endorse the principle that parents should have broad discretion in controlling the medical care their children receive.

Conversion therapy is straight up parental abuse, homie. In my opinion, it should be outlawed. If parents want to try to help their kids through the lord or whatever, then go for it. But sending a kid to a camp to have a bunch of weirdos strap them to chairs and watch porn all day is sick.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Help me out here, Jayhawk. How does is that even a "nod" to conversion therapy? States have every right to outlaw that psuedo-scientific bullsh!t, but I whole-heartedly endorse the principle that parents should have broad discretion in controlling the medical care their children receive.

I don't know this source, but I this is the basic argument.
Watch GOP Chair Reince Priebus Lie About LGBT Portions of the 2016 Republican Platform - The New Civil Rights Movement

 

[wizards8507]

I don't know this source, but I this is the basic argument.
Watch GOP Chair Reince Priebus Lie About LGBT Portions of the 2016 Republican Platform - The New Civil Rights Movement

Yeah, that headline is horse shit. In the very platform that you linked to, the word "conversion" appears zero times.

"We support the ability of all organizations to provide, purchase, or enroll in healthcare coverage consistent with their religious, moral, or ethical convictions without discrimination or penalty. We support the right of parents to determine the proper medical treatment and therapy for their minor children. We support the right of parents to consent to medical treatment for their minor children and urge enactment of legislation that would require parental consent for their daughter to be transported across state lines for abortion."

That's the line they're twisting into "conversion therapy."