2016 Election

Gov Nathan Deal for President
Just heard this guy this morning
This guy gets it
""I do not think that we have to discriminate against anyone to protect the faith-based community in Georgia of which I and my family have been a part of for all of our lives"
Hooray for Gov Deal

North Carolina does not get it
They just made it legal to discriminate

Christianity is supposed to be about love and acceptance

Quote: TomG

It's cheaper for the party to get it done in two hours instead of lasting all day

Thanks; I hadn't thought of that.

Regardless of whether the law passes or not IMO it doesn't make a bit of difference. It just basically says you can't refuse business with someone due to religious issues. However in the real world where if that is the reason they don't want to do business with you, they will just state a legal reason for doing so. Whether this law passes or gets overruled is merely symbolic because it does absolutely nothing to change actual actions. IMO the only thing it changes is now you can be discriminatory without feeling any PR consequences. If you forced these people to state I refused business with X person due to the fact they are homosexuals, the firestorm created would be much more intense than denying business because they were "being disruptive"

Quote: RonC

Donald J. "I'm Gonna Sue You" Trump is at it again...

"Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump threatened Sunday to sue Ted Cruz over potentially claiming more Louisiana delegates in a state he technically won. "

"Just to show you how unfair Republican primary politics can be, I won the State of Louisiana and get less delegates than Cruz-Lawsuit coming" (from his Twitter feed)

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/28/trump-threatens-lawsuit-over-lost-louisiana-delegates.html

You know he's eventually gonna threaten Hillary with a nonsense lawsuit (assuming they both get to the general election).

We should take bets on what he will threaten her over... Email server? Anti-Trump super-pac ad? Something else?

This is a MUST READ. A former strategist for Trump confirms what we all knew deep down: Trump never wanted to be President. He was in it all for himself. And now that he's in first his ego has taken over...

http://www.xojane.com/issues/stephanie-cegielski-donald-trump-campaign-defector

Normally I don't contribute to political threads, but I must admit the story of the picture of Trump's wife had me titillated. Here the picture that they have been blurring out parts of. It doesn't look any more racy to me than a Victoria's Secret commercial.



Here is one I like better.

Quote: ams288

This is a MUST READ. A former strategist for Trump confirms what we all knew deep down: Trump never wanted to be President. He was in it all for himself. And now that he's in first his ego has taken over...

http://www.xojane.com/issues/stephanie-cegielski-donald-trump-campaign-defector

I've read the same kind of babble about many of the egotistical folks that desire the Presidency. They are into themselves and blame staffers instead of taking the blame for themselves.

This in itself means very little; it could grow in meaning if more people came out saying these things.

Quote: ams288

This is a MUST READ. A former strategist for Trump confirms what we all knew deep down: Trump never wanted to be President. He was in it all for himself. And now that he's in first his ego has taken over...

http://www.xojane.com/issues/stephanie-cegielski-donald-trump-campaign-defector

Red flag after red flag pops up as to Trump's character since he started this run. What's one more?

He's rich and successful. How could anything be wrong with him?

Quote: ams288

This is a MUST READ. A former strategist for Trump confirms what we all knew deep down: Trump never wanted to be President.

In fact, Trump's friends say he's wanted to
be president since the early 90's. His golf
buddies say he's been running it by them
for 20 years. Rush says whenever he's played
golf with Trump in the last 10 years, Trump
usually brings it up. He's been planning his
campaign for years and years.

Quote: Gabes22

Regardless of whether the law passes or not IMO it doesn't make a bit of difference. It just basically says you can't refuse business with someone due to religious issues. However in the real world where if that is the reason they don't want to do business with you, they will just state a legal reason for doing so. Whether this law passes or gets overruled is merely symbolic because it does absolutely nothing to change actual actions. IMO the only thing it changes is now you can be discriminatory without feeling any PR consequences. If you forced these people to state I refused business with X person due to the fact they are homosexuals, the firestorm created would be much more intense than denying business because they were "being disruptive"

I thought the Georgia 757 Bill only applied to religious organizations being able to refuse to perform/hold LBGT marriages in their facilities. Non-religious businesses were offered no protection under 757.

Quote: Wizard

Normally I don't contribute to political threads, but I must admit the story of the picture of Trump's wife had me titillated. Here the picture that they have been blurring out parts of. It doesn't look any more racy to me than a Victoria's Secret commercial.



Here is one I like better.

Don't click here if easily offended

I couldn't agree more with this post.

I still say she has Bruce, I mean, Caitlin Jenner's face.

Quote: EvenBob

In fact, Trump's friends say he's wanted to
be president since the early 90's. His golf
buddies say he's been running it by them
for 20 years. Rush says whenever he's played
golf with Trump in the last 10 years, Trump
usually brings it up. He's been planning his
campaign for years and years.

"In fact" ?

How can you take anything out of Rush's mouth as fact?

He could have been on an OxyContin binge when he talked about golfing with Trump.

Never trust anything out of a junkie's mouth.

Quote: ams288

"In fact" ?

How can you take anything out of Rush's mouth as fact?

He could have been on an OxyContin binge when he talked about golfing with Trump.

Never trust anything out of a junkie's mouth.

So we're expected to believe the non-factual stuff from one source and not the other? Both have an agenda.

Actually, EB did not say that it was a "fact" that Trump wanted to be President...he said that it was a "fact" that Rush said that Trump has said that he wanted to be President for a long time. Rush did say that he heard that straight from Trump, so it is a "fact" that Rush said it (not that Trump said it); none of us have to accept anything but that one person who is not Trump is saying one thing and another one who is also not Trump is saying something different.

There aren't a whole lot of "facts" involved but it is a "fact" that both sets of things were reportedly said...

Quote: Paradigm

I thought the Georgia 757 Bill only applied to religious organizations being able to refuse to perform/hold LBGT marriages in their facilities. Non-religious businesses were offered no protection under 757.

If that is the case I was talking about something different, it was a bill about hiring

So much hoopla on the news today about Trump's campaign manager getting charged with a misdemeanor over him grabbing that Breitbart reporter.

I hate to side with Trump, but it really seems like much ado about nothing.

The video they keep showing does not seem like he committed any crime. She doesn't even seem to react very much to him grabbing her.

She has a history of making assault claims.

Five years ago, she claimed members of the NYPD hit her with their batons.

On another occasion, she accused former Congressman Alan West of groping her.

Nothing came of either accusation.

Quote: ams288

"In fact" ?

How can you take anything out of Rush's mouth as fact?

He could have been on an OxyContin binge when he talked about golfing with Trump.

Never trust anything out of a junkie's mouth.

I have a lot easier time believing an ex-junkie than Rush.

Anytime I accidentally here is vitriol on a radio, I cringe. His hate speech is worse than nails on a chalkboard.

Quote: petroglyph

I have a lot easier time believing an ex-junkie than Rush.

This is why Rush has been number 1 in
talk radio for 25 years, because of all
the lies he tells. You do realize that a
real liar would be found out almost
immediately and lose his audience
overnight. Yet there Rush is, 25 years
of Excellence in Broadcasting, and
nobody has caught onto his lies
except those who never listen to
him. They are oh so smart, don't
you know..

Quote: EvenBob

This is why Rush has been number 1 in
talk radio for 25 years, because of all
the lies he tells. You do realize that a
real liar would be found out almost
immediately and lose his audience
overnight. Yet there Rush is, 25 years
of Excellence in Broadcasting, and
nobody has caught onto his lies
except those who never listen to
him. They are oh so smart, don't
you know..

It takes a lot more reading then most people have time or inclination for, to notice the "spin". Sometimes it's a word or a fact left out of a story that totally changes the way it is perceived by an audience. Who is often looking for affirmation in what their pier group already repeats over and over, until for them, there is no other possible truth. The last time I was around a bit of his show, it was just Republican hate radio. He has an agenda and it has paid him well. Not denying that. Hillary has been in business for decades as well, does that make her honest ?

Leave out a touch of history on Libya here, or promote "wmds" there, or American CIA and the Shaw of Iran, and the audience is being effectively manipulated. His show is propaganda, like all of the msm. Don't get me wrong and think I support the opposite, that the lib media is any better, it is not. But yeah, there is spin in his talks. Of course there is. I don't like the cadence of his speech, like Amy Goodman on the left.

Search CIA and American media influence. If the msm wasn't promoting the message our controllers want them to, they wouldn't have licensing on the air waves, simple.

I didn't say lie, but I do believe what I said about spin, and also ex-junkies. Many of those that get cleaned up are dead serious about honesty.

I think Gilbert Gottfried and Fran Drescher's voices are probably more tolerable than Limbaugh's. Whether I agree with what he says or not he sounds like nails on a chalkboard.

I haven't listened to the afternoon conservative block in a long time--it was pretty much Rush, Hannity, Michael Berry (syndicated but not in that many markets), and Mark Levin the last time I listened to it primarily when driving...that was a few years ago. I stopped listening to each of them for different reasons. Limbaugh's cadence changed and his ability to make phone calls interesting went away when he started having hearing issues. It became painful to my ears. Hannity just bored me and seemed overly simplistic. He was more fun back in the Flipper days...the bit about her saving a lobster by throwing it in a freshwater pond was hilarious. Berry? I like him; just don't switch stations for him. Levin? He may be right about a lot of stuff, but he is creepy.

petroglyph, of course Rush spins the news. He is very up front about his spin and everybody knows where he is coming from. It's not some secret that his listeners do not know about. The reason his radio show is so popular and has been since the late 80s is because there are very few outlets out there for conservative news. Most every major media outlet from NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, PBS, CNN has a leftward slant to their news programming and it is in many of the ways in which you pointed out rush does, but those news networks tend to hide behind a veil that they are being neutral when they completely are not. With Rush, he is an unabashed conservative and if you don't wish to hear commentary from the conservative POV, then don't listen to him.

Quote: Gabes22

.... those news networks tend to hide behind a veil that they are being neutral when they completely are not.

There's the deal right there, they are not "news", they are propaganda, a means of control. An alternative spin on the truth is being pumped into them majority's head 24/7. http://www.infowars.com/7-things-about-the-mainstream-media-that-they-do-not-want-you-to-know/ I know Alex Jones as a source, : ) : ). But that's the point. Now, there are less than 6 opinions on over 90% of all media.

I don't know if you read my post or not, I sure as Hell did not defend Fox, otay? I have said before, most people are so busy eeking out a life, they don't have the time or passion to ferret out the snippets of truth from hours of info. Actually a person would have to be a bit obsessed to be able to cross reference three different angles on the same story's, but that is about what it takes.

Similar to this election, posters know in their heart of hearts that it won't matter who get's elected. You will get the same results packaged in a different color. Although most realize there is a deep state that controls the paradigm it is a lot easier to just tip head down, collect check, and live their lives. But that does not change the truth, it is just, how much does the truth matter? Tossing these candidates back and forth like it makes a difference is folderol.

There is very little investigative reporting these days, and if they dare step sideways, their careers become instantly more challenging. How many times do we see news stories reversed, within hours?

One "news personality" that really disappointed me was Lou Dobbs. He had a good show and about the time 0, came into his first turn, Lou was hammering on about two border agents that were sent to prison, who had shot [in a butt cheek] an escaping [to Mexico] known drug runner. They received a mock trial in Texas and were given around 11 years in general population. Those guys were really trying to interdict drug shipments.

A while into it, and somebody fires a few shots into Lou's ranch house, and he soon loses his show. I was upset. He came back a year later with the standard double speaking drivel the rest of them have, and no word about the border guards serving out their time. There was hope that zero, once he got in office would pardon them. Didn't happen.

Quote:

With Rush, he is an unabashed conservative and if you don't wish to hear commentary from the conservative POV, then don't listen to him.

OK, thanks. People act/speak as if the elected government of our country was a sporting event, it's not, it is our freedom and our lives. It galls me, that so many gave the ultimate sacrifice, and all that we the public can muster for candidates are the pigs that are running. Fourteen "Superdelegates", are also registered lobbyists. The election has been bought off, as well as "the news".

It wouldn't matter if we elected Peyton Manning or the Pope as far as the results go. Were you around to listen to conservative talk radio when Reagan/Ollie North were smuggling cocaine from Nicaragua to purchase arms for Iran? They are all guilty, but by all means be comfortable with your preferred flavor of spin. Surely you recall "WMD's", how did that work out? HUD housing? NINJA loans, tbtf banks, fiat currency...etc. "Let your yoke rest lightly on your shoulders"

I think I am in complete agreement with you petroglyph, we are just saying the same thing in different ways

Donald Trump did a town hall with Chris Matthews that will air on MSNBC tonight.

Apparently, Trump said that there should be "some kind of punishment" for women who have abortions.

Chris asked if the fathers of those aborted fetuses should also be punished, Trump's response: "I would say no...."

LOL.

Keep diggin that hole with the ladies, Don.

Can this republican nomination cycle get any more childish
Trump and Cruz are backing off supporting who ever wins the nomination
Why?
Maybe a difference in important issues
nope
Its because they are insulting each others wives
Please children, stop calling each other names
"Lying Ted" and "Sleazy Donald"
this is straight from the playground
If you want to be President, act like an adult

Holy crap.

He has clearly put no thought into the issue of abortion at all. He tries to turn the question around on Chris Matthews as if Chris is running for some office.

Democratic strategists around the country are all celebrating right now.

I become more and more convinced every day that even if he has the most delegates, the Republican "establishment" will find a way to steal the nomination from Trump.

Quote: ams288

I become more and more convinced every day that even if he has the most delegates, the Republican "establishment" will find a way to steal the nomination from Trump.

Personally, while I would probably wind up voting for him, he is not my first choice or even my second, then again neither was Ted Cruz. I find it interesting how high Kasich is getting in the futures markets. I don't think the powers that be in the Republican party want either Trump or Cruz

Matthews is a hack. He asked, if abortion were illegal would you support punishment for a women that got an abortion. Trump said yes. OK, there is a law, if someone breaks the law do you think they should be punished? Had he answered "no" I would be very disappointed. Not a Trump fan, don't get me wrong, but the spin from the anti-Trump camp may wind up swinging me his way. Pissed off, big time...SOB's...

Quote: TwoFeathersATL

Matthews is a hack. He asked, if abortion were illegal would you support punishment for a women that got an abortion. Trump said yes. OK, there is a law, if someone breaks the law do you think they should be punished? Had he answered "no" I would be very disappointed. Not a Trump fan, don't get me wrong, but the spin from the anti-Trump camp may wind up swinging me his way. Pissed off, big time...SOB's...

Matthews should be given an award for that interview.

It's a completely logical question: righties claim abortion is "murder." So logically, if a woman allows a fetus to be aborted, isn't she complicent in that "murder?"

I did not realize that most pro-lifers actually disagree that the woman should be held responsible. They blame the doctors. (I cannot understand how anyone who actually thinks abortion is "murder" doesn't blame the woman for said "murder." The doctors didn't track the women down and perform the abortion against the woman's wishes. But there are many things in right winger brains I cannot understand...)

Trump clearly had never thought about abortion very much other than his "I am very pro-life" stump speech repetitions.

And he really stepped in it.

Even the pro-life groups came out afterwards and were like, "Ummm.... No. That's even too far for us."

Quote: ams288

Matthews should be given an award for that interview.

It's a completely logical question: righties claim abortion is "murder." So logically, if a woman allows a fetus to be aborted, isn't she complicent in that "murder?"

I did not realize that most pro-lifers actually disagree that the woman should be held responsible. They blame the doctors. (I cannot understand how anyone who actually thinks abortion is "murder" doesn't blame the woman for said "murder." The doctors didn't track the women down and perform the abortion against the woman's wishes. But there are many things in right winger brains I cannot understand...)

Trump clearly had never thought about abortion very much other than his "I am very pro-life" stump speech repetitions.

And he really stepped in it.

Even the pro-life groups came out afterwards and were like, "Ummm.... No. That's even too far for us."

BS. Period. If there is a law should it be enforced? If you answer 'no' I hope you live in some other country. I got no place for you here.

Quote: TwoFeathersATL

BS. Period. If there is a law should it be enforced? If you answer 'no' I hope you live in some other country. I got no place for you here.

http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/22530/does-the-average-american-unwittingly-commit-three-felonies-a-day

Add into that, there are 40 thousand new laws passed per year. http://www.mediaite.com/online/happy-new-year-here-are-some-of-the-40000-new-laws-taking-effect-today/#0

Do you want them all enforced? All federal and or all state, what if they conflict like mmj?

Still don't get why people hate particular questions. Like Megan Kelly. Trump somehow managed to gain more support from the question he considered improper. For one thing, I don't think throwing the candidates own words back at them is ever improper.

And a candidate gaining support instead of being thrown off is what you should hope to happen.

Heck, if there are improper questions, it's probably the softball question which set the candidates up for an easy win, not the so-called "gotcha questions".

Quote: TwoFeathersATL

BS. Period. If there is a law should it be enforced? If you answer 'no' I hope you live in some other country. I got no place for you here.

You don't understand the technique of the trick question. If Trump were halfway well informed, he could have replied with,well, we don't enforce immigration, labor, health and many other statutes. Why pick on just one sensitive question when so many kindred ones abound? It is all a question of which laws we like and which we don't.

Quote: TwoFeathersATL

BS. Period. If there is a law should it be enforced? If you answer 'no' I hope you live in some other country. I got no place for you here.

I don't know what you are considering "B.S." What law is not being enforced in regards to abortion? (It's legal).

I actually think we are close to being on the same page here (or as close as we'll ever be).

If I thought abortion was murder (I don't)- I would certainly think the women should be punished for allowing that to take place.

Quote: TwoFeathersATL

Matthews is a hack. He asked, if abortion were illegal would you support punishment for a women that got an abortion. Trump said yes. OK, there is a law, if someone breaks the law do you think they should be punished? Had he answered "no" I would be very disappointed. Not a Trump fan, don't get me wrong, but the spin from the anti-Trump camp may wind up swinging me his way. Pissed off, big time...SOB's...

I agree it was a fail question. Well, not really, it was a blatant setup. He was asked if abortion were totally illegal should the woman be charged. And, yes logically if it were illegal she would have to be "punished". Trump did not say he wants to make it totally illegal.

It was a lose lose question that was a great way to anger both liberals and conservatives against him, there was no politically sound answer.

It's one of those questions that is irrelevant because it will never be totally outlawed, and women will never be punished. Its only purpose was to provoke a polarizing answer, and they succeeded.

I am pro-life. I don't want to "punish" anyone for abortion but I want there to be less and less of them...without a whole bunch of laws...

However, it still seems to me that there is an imbalance in the laws we have. It is a fetus, it is a baby, etc. depending on what happens where. A woman has an abortion, a fetus ceases to exist. Legal. A woman gets punched in the stomach and a fetus dies; well, that person could be charged with the death of the fetus (instead of just with the battery against the woman). One can weave all kinds of how this is this and that is that, but the bottom line is that either killing a fetus is wrong or it is not. If a fetus is not a being (by law), then there should not be laws that provide punishment for harming them. How can it be a being under law to one person and not to another?

Trump has to learn to see "gotcha" questions and think about his answers. They are a fact of life and they have to be handled very carefully. Something can be lose/lose but one of the "lose" scenarios can be much worse than the other; that is kind of what happened here.

The GOP is a hot mess, Hillary could be indicted...I am beginning to see a path (a narrow one now) to a Sanders presidency. That scares me.

Quote: RonC

Trump has to learn to see "gotcha" questions and think about his answers. They are a fact of life and they have to be handled very carefully. Something can be lose/lose but one of the "lose" scenarios can be much worse than the other; that is kind of what happened here.

But this wasn't a "gotcha" question. This wasn't a lose/lose question (amongst the people on the right who would consider voting for such a candidate).

Trump was just too stupid to know the correct "pro-life" answer.

Had Chris Matthews asked Ted Cruz or John Kasich the same question, they would have known what to say (the "we don't blame the woman - we blame the doctor" B.S. they usually rattle off).

It's not BS though. There are legitimate reasons to view the act of abortion as a homicide and those have been illustrated in this thread. That said, if the doctors would not provide the service then the female couldn't seek it out. If the doctors don't provide the service and the female does it on her own accord in the bathroom, they IMO that is on her, but if abortion would be made illegal (something I want but don't foresee hapening) it would make the doctor a criminal for providing the service and it would make the woman a criminal for seeking it out and having it performed on her. That said, I am unsure how far I wish to go in persuing the criminality of people who perform it or seek it out given that the practice has been legalized for over 40 years. That said as well, police officers are not all that shy about enforcing newer laws regarding things that have been legal for a long time. For instance when seat belt laws were first introduced and they have special sting operations for those violations, oftentimes coupled with a DUI checkpoint, or for talking on your phone while driving. It gets murky IMO when deciding to mete out punishment

Quote: ams288

But this wasn't a "gotcha" question. This wasn't a lose/lose question (amongst the people on the right who would consider voting for such a candidate).

Trump was just too stupid to know the correct "pro-life" answer.

Had Chris Matthews asked Ted Cruz or John Kasich the same question, they would have known what to say (the "we don't blame the woman - we blame the doctor" B.S. they usually rattle off).

Over at DT we are discussing this issue regarding women, abortion and punishment
Come over and add to the discussion:-)

The Huffington Post just took a close look at Trumps recent speech
71 lies in 1 hour
They break down every lie :-)
Wow
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-fact-check_us_56fc375fe4b0daf53aee9175

I'm "pro-it's not any of my damn business"

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I'm "pro-it's not our my damn business"

Very well said. Just too many people in this world who think that they know what is best for everyone else.................

Quote: steeldco

Very well said. Just too many people in this world who think that they know what is best for everyone else.................

Thanks. I had to fix a SwypeO. "Our" was supposed to be "any"

Quote: steeldco

Very well said. Just too many people in this world who think that they know what is best for everyone else.................

I think we all agree on what is "best" for everyone else in the abortion situation...don't get in the situation...it was happens after the "best" doesn't that we argue about!

I just had an epiphany. I have voted for the Republican nominee every election since college. I just don't think I can vote for Donald Trump. I see no path to the presidency for anyone other than Hilary Clinton. Kasich, Rubio, Jeb... all were candidates I could support.
If the republicans end up conventioneering anyone other than Cruz or Trump I could vote for him or her. The problem is Hilary would kill any manufactured candidate in the general.

Quote: SOOPOO

I just had an epiphany. I have voted for the Republican nominee every election since college. I just don't think I can vote for Donald Trump. I see no path to the presidency for anyone other than Hilary Clinton. Kasich, Rubio, Jeb... all were candidates I could support.
If the republicans end up conventioneering anyone other than Cruz or Trump I could vote for him or her. The problem is Hilary would kill any manufactured candidate in the general.

Kasich could give Hillary a good run for her money...

I don't think Hillary is the kind of candidate who can "kill" anyone in the election this fall. Can she win? Certainly. There are just enough negative feelings about her to make it by a huge margin.

Of course, the only number that matters is 270...and she has a clearer path to that than to a landslide in the actual vote tally.