Team Rubio

[KnightofChrist]

Too early to know one way or another. Ronald Reagan came in second in 1980 he went on to win the White House. George H. W. Bush (1988) is the only candidate to place third in Iowa but still win the White House.

[Peace]

17 minutes ago, PhuturePriest said:

I don't know how people can still defend Trump when 60% of his retweets (praising him) are from accounts which are blatantly racist and supremacist. Also, the accounts of his supporters attacking Latinos and literally doing the sieg heil should be enough of a clue.

Come on now. There is no more racism in the US. We have a colored president.

[KnightofChrist]

Don't worry guys any GOP candidate that wins the primaries will be labeled a racist/self-hating racist.

[Peace]

3 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

Don't worry guys any GOP candidate that wins the primaries will be labeled a racist/self-hating racist.

I don't think those type of accusations were made very often against Romney or McCain. Were they? Maybe there were and I did not notice it very much.

I think it might be tough to paint Rubio that way given his stance on immigration, the black lives matter movement, and so forth. Plus, Latinos are not as Republican adverse as African Americans typically are...

[Makarioi]

Anything a GOP candidate does is wrong.  We have a 1/2 white (dare say 1/2 'colored') president that was elected on shady terms and reelected on gimme terms.  Anything a Democrat does is hidden or accepted by the media.  No one refers to history and I think that its erased or twisted in terms of a Democrat.  

Ted's camp supposedly tweeted before last night that Ben withdrew from the race.  If that's true, low and dirty.    I don't put that much into Iowa or NH, as history shows just because you win them, doesn't mean you win it in the end. I'm so tired of all this.  It's not what it used to be and I'm sure that my parents thought the same thing! 

and Megan Kelly must be hormonal...........

[KnightofChrist]

12 minutes ago, Peace said:

I don't think those type of accusations were made very often against Romney or McCain. Were they? Maybe there were and I did not notice it very much.

I think it might be tough to paint Rubio that way given his stance on immigration, the black lives matter movement, and so forth. Plus, Latinos are not as Republican adverse as African Americans typically are...

Yes, happens every election year to the Republican candidate. Romney and McCain both were accused of racism many times many different ways. Rubio has been accused of coded racism for something he said about Obama. Univision and some other pro-illegal immigrate groups have accused both Cruz and Rubio of self-hating racism or being sellouts. And who ever leads the pack I'm sure the media will find some wacko that supports him/her and use it to paint the candidate and his/her supporters as racist/wackos.

It's a lame game with the same plays every four years. Anyway if Rubio gets out in front it will happen to him too, well more so than now.

Edited February 2, 2016 by KnightofChrist

[Peace]

9 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

Yes, happens every election year to the Republican candidate. Romney and McCain both were accused of racism many times many different ways. Rubio has been accused of coded racism for something he said about Obama. Univision and some other pro-illegal immigrate groups have accused both Cruz and Rubio of self-hating racism or being sellouts. And who ever leads the pack I'm sure the media will find some wacko that supports him/her and use it to paint the candidate and his/her supporters as racist/wackos.

It's a lame game with the same plays every four years. Anyway if Rubio gets out in front it will happen to him too, well more so than now.

I honestly don't recall it having come up that much with them, other than an isolated incident here or there. I remember Bush being accused of it with some frequency though.

Of course someone will always throw out an accusation here or there, but I honestly didn't pick up on too many people who thought those two were racists. And the vast majority of my friends lean left...

[KnightofChrist]

Just now, Peace said:

I honestly don't recall it having come up that much with them, other than an isolated incident here or there. I remember Bush being accused of it with some frequency though.

Of course someone will always throw out an accusation here or there, but I honestly didn't pick up on too many people who thought those two were racists. And the vast majority of my friends lean left...

https://www.google.com/search?q=Romeny+racism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=Romney+racist

https://www.google.com/search?q=McCain+racism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

It happened a lot for both candidates. It's a common form of attack by the left. Anyway, I remember it happening a lot, but I read a lot of news and a lot of news sources. If history is any clue it will happen again this year, heck it already has happened.

[Peace]

Thanks. I actually googled it myself and did not come up with much other than the Monkey thing. I was firmly in the Obama Camp in 2008, but I don't think too many people I know thought of MCCain as a racist. At least he never struck me that way. He was hella old though.

The GOP does have a racism problem among a significant minority of its base though. I think that anyone looking at the party objectively should realize that. It started with a very real appeal to racist feelings in order to garner votes (the so-called Southern Strategy). I don't think any political historians will deny that. And  the GOP had not really done enough to rid itself of that image. It's not only the poorer minority groups that the GOP fairs  badly with, but also wealthier minority groups like Asian Americans. If your party fairs poorly with all minority groups regardless of social status I think it should be an indicator of something bad within the party itself, notwithstanding media bias.

I am not saying that Republicans are a bunch of racists or anything, but there does seem to be a significant minority of people within the party who hold those views. At least to me. The GOP needs to figure out what to do about those folks in the upcoming decades and the demographic shift, if it is to remain viable I think.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Peace

[KnightofChrist]

Both parties have a similar racism problem. But only one gets attention and only one gets away with it. Heck, historically speaking the Democrat party has a long list of crimes against humanity involving racism that they've never apologized for, yet some how they are able to fool people into believing they are the party of minorities. The Democrat party holds similar bigoted beliefs today about personhood when it comes to abortion that it held when it supported slavery and in both ages minorities are disproportional targeted. But we've discussed that before. I must get back to work, have a good day.

 

 

[Peace]

44 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

Both parties have a similar racism problem. But only one gets attention and only one gets away with it. Heck, historically speaking the Democrat party has a long list of crimes against humanity involving racism that they've never apologized for, yet some how they are able to fool people into believing they are the party of minorities. The Democrat party holds similar bigoted beliefs today about personhood when it comes to abortion that it held when it supported slavery and in both ages minorities are disproportional targeted. But we've discussed that before. I must get back to work, have a good day.

Nah. The GOP has a bigger problem. But that is not to say that the Dems don't have plenty of problems of their own.

If you assert that the problem is the same in both parties, then I think the only conclusion to draw is that minority groups in the US are stupid and continue to vote for one party over the other merely because they have been duped into thinking that the GOP is more racist. That would seem especially true for Asian Americans because there do not seem to be any financial factors that would cause them to have leaned so heavily in favor of Obama. I think that the more likely scenario is that the GOP is in fact more racist and minority groups vote accordingly. That whole birther thing and trying to portray Obama as a Muslim, etc. were pretty clear examples to most minority groups.

Folks in the GOP can try to deny that problem, or say that it is equally bad in both parties, but you will do that to your and my peril as the country becomes more and more brown. I think it is a legitimate issue that needs to be faced if the party is to remain relevant. I don't think that denial will work in the long term.

I don't think that the pro-choice position is racist against minorities though (the abomination that it is). You have more white children killed every year than black, even though the rate among blacks is higher.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Peace

[PhuturePriest]

A common sense article on why Rubio's popularity across the spectrum doesn't make him Romney: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/430704/marco-rubio-and-different-definitions-establishment?Mf07YUAYtMy5MEKO.01

That article is a breath of fresh air after all the recent nonsense about him. Since when has the once honored 2010 Tea Party underdog hero been an establishment lapdog? If there is a difference between his economic policy and Cruz's, I've yet to see it. Not promising to shut down the border and refraining from erroneously promising to "make the sand glow" does not make Rubio the reincarnation of Romney, and doing so does not make Cruz a "true conservative." Rubio's economic voting record is mostly solid (and I say "mostly" simply because I hold the possibility it isn't perfectly consistent,) and as a bonus, his wife isn't an employee of Goldman Sachs, unlike the "true," "grassroots," "anti-establishment" Cruz, who has received significant backing and financial support in his elections by major corporations, including (you guessed it) Goldman Sachs.

Argue if you'd like that Cruz would be a better candidate, but this idiotic claim that Cruz is somehow "purer" than Rubio is ridiculous. Having different ideas on how to tackle immigration and war do not contaminate a candidate's political purity. This is a political party, not a cult. Candidates are allowed to express different solutions to problems. Besides, if we're going by "purity," I'd figure literally being in bed with a Goldman Sachs investment manager would be considered a major contaminant to one's pureblood status.

[KnightofChrist]

18 hours ago, Peace said:

Nah. The GOP has a bigger problem. But that is not to say that the Dems don't have plenty of problems of their own.

If you assert that the problem is the same in both parties, then I think the only conclusion to draw is that minority groups in the US are stupid and continue to vote for one party over the other merely because they have been duped into thinking that the GOP is more racist. That would seem especially true for Asian Americans because there do not seem to be any financial factors that would cause them to have leaned so heavily in favor of Obama. I think that the more likely scenario is that the GOP is in fact more racist and minority groups vote accordingly. That whole birther thing and trying to portray Obama as a Muslim, etc. were pretty clear examples to most minority groups.

Folks in the GOP can try to deny that problem, or say that it is equally bad in both parties, but you will do that to your and my peril as the country becomes more and more brown. I think it is a legitimate issue that needs to be faced if the party is to remain relevant. I don't think that denial will work in the long term.

I don't think that the pro-choice position is racist against minorities though (the abomination that it is). You have more white children killed every year than black, even though the rate among blacks is higher.

I can agree that the GOP has a race problem. I cannot however say that it is worse than the Democrat party. Having learned as much as I have about the history of the abortion movement I cannot in good conscience make the same conclusions you have. I must assume for the sake of charity that you are uneducated about the movement's racist eugenicist roots which heavily influence it today.

Edited February 3, 2016 by KnightofChrist

[superblue]

21 hours ago, Makarioi said:

Anything a GOP candidate does is wrong.  We have a 1/2 white (dare say 1/2 'colored') president that was elected on shady terms and reelected on gimme terms.  Anything a Democrat does is hidden or accepted by the media.  No one refers to history and I think that its erased or twisted in terms of a Democrat.  

Ted's camp supposedly tweeted before last night that Ben withdrew from the race.  If that's true, low and dirty.    I don't put that much into Iowa or NH, as history shows just because you win them, doesn't mean you win it in the end. I'm so tired of all this.  It's not what it used to be and I'm sure that my parents thought the same thing! 

and Megan Kelly must be hormonal...........

did you really just say a half colored president, elected on shady terms, ffs that is hilarious.

Megan Kelly and everyone on Fox is a giant pozer, you ever look at the people on fake news ? everyone there in the day time and prime time is selected and dressed to be eye candy for a certain age range, they have the biggest fake personalities to try and appear as everyday people, perv bill oriley under normal circumstances would have been tanked for even slight allegations of sexual misconduct, but since he is a cash cow he gets a pass. an if it wasn't for que cards and tele promptors no one would have a clue on what to do. They keep reporting on " the media " as if it is some vague notion that does not apply to them, and they have become the exact opposite of what they started as.

Your local news station and talk radio are the last real news information sources , while fox news has just become another " news " entertainment station.

As for the repulsive party, they need a giant wake up call, when they had all the cards finally stacked in their favor, and had a chance to do something positive for the country, they instead stabbed everyone in the back like cowards and sided with their democrat counterparts. I can't figure out how many politicians actually believe their own bs of trying to be bi partisan vs those who are wallowing in the filth of their own power, to in turn figure on who is best to vote for.

Marc rubio, and the like, are nothing but snacks for the clinton powerhouse , and are easily going to be puppets of the campaign financiers, etc, hate Trump till you are blue in the face, the guy has more money than he can count now, and at least thinks on his own, and speaks his mind, to a degree anyhow. he has the typical loser campaign handlers who are bound to muck up things for him. But he stands the best chance at burring clinton when it comes time.

An to think that Iowa is the final word on anything is a joke, though it is sad that swing states are now the key to any presidency, there is a very long year ahead of everyone, and what is going to happen is the typical republican candidates are going to stick with the same schtick and keep taking it in the ear, while clinton will escape all criminal prosecution and repercussions for her either blatant stupidity or purposeful neglect of privacy laws in regards to her email mess. An if Trump doesn't win, we will see obama care become solidified and probably more things inline come to pass as Bush and others have done in the past.

[Peace]

2 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

I can agree that the GOP has a race problem. I cannot however say that it is worse than the Democrat party. Having learned as much as I have about the history of the abortion movement I cannot in good conscience make the same conclusions you have. I must assume for the sake of charity that you are uneducated about the movement's racist eugenicist roots which heavily influence it today.

I am familiar with Margaret Sanger. There is evidence to suggest that she wanted to use contraceptive methods as a means of reducing the number of African Americans. But I don't think there is much to suggest that she was pro-abortion. She actually appears to have to opposed abortion.

Nevertheless, even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Planned Parenthood originated as an organization aimed at killing off black babies, I don't see what that has to do with the state of abortion in the year 2015. More white babies are killed than black. The birth rate is lower for whites than blacks. There is not much evidence that people involved in the abortion movement today advocate for it as a secret means of killing off black people. 

Of course, abortion is terrible because every being has a right to life. But I find the whole conspiracy-to-kill-off-black-people argument to be rather unconvincing. I do not think it is a good argument.

Abortion is fundamentally wrong. Convince people of that and there is no need to engage in discussions concerning whether the application of it is racist.

And having walked the Earth for 30+ years in black skin I really don't think I need someone to tell me when something is racist against people of my own ethnic group. I don't go around trying to tell Jewish people what they should consider to be anti-Semitic.

 

 

Edited February 3, 2016 by Peace