Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member wittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    14 Aug '11 20:22
    After the Iowa Straw Poll yesterday (which ended with Bachmann, Paul, and Pawlenty taking first, close second, and distant third, respectively), Pawlenty announced the withdrawal of his candidacy.

    Thoughts? Who do conservatives here favor?

    Arbitrarily speaking, remaining first-tier candidates include Perry, Romney, and Bachmann. Second-tier candidates probably include Paul, Gingrich, Cain, Huntsman, and Santorum. Significant but undeclared potential alternatives include Guiliani and Palin.
  2. 14 Aug '11 22:56
    Originally posted by wittywonka
    After the Iowa Straw Poll yesterday (which ended with Bachmann, Paul, and Pawlenty taking first, close second, and distant third, respectively), Pawlenty announced the withdrawal of his candidacy.

    Thoughts? Who do conservatives here favor?

    Arbitrarily speaking, remaining first-tier candidates include Perry, Romney, and Bachmann. Second-tier candid ...[text shortened]... an, and Santorum. Significant but undeclared potential alternatives include Guiliani and Palin.
    I suppose it will ultimately prove beneficial to the Democrats that the relatively moderate Republican presidential hopefuls are being weeded out.

    Ideally the republican ticket will incorporate the more ideological candidates, Palin, Bachmann, but in the end I suppose the presidential candidate will end up being an establishment republican. The real contest here, in my humble opinion, is between Romney and Perry, that is of course if the GOP will hold electability to be the priority, instead of ideological authenticity or any other qualities the Tea Party contenders are offering which the establishment ones may be lacking.
  3. 15 Aug '11 00:34
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    I suppose it will ultimately prove beneficial to the Democrats that the relatively moderate Republican presidential hopefuls are being weeded out.

    Ideally the republican ticket will incorporate the more ideological candidates, Palin, Bachmann, but in the end I suppose the presidential candidate will end up being an establishment republican. The rea ...[text shortened]... her qualities the Tea Party contenders are offering which the establishment ones may be lacking.
    "I suppose it will ultimately prove beneficial to the Democrats that the relatively moderate Republican presidential hopefuls are being weeded out."

    I find it amusing that folks who will not vote Republican want to descibe republican candidates as moderate as if that is a necessary requirement for a Republican to win.

    Look backward. G.W. Bush, a moderate wins two terms by the slimest of margins. Bob Dole, and G.H.W. Bush both moderates lose to Bill Clinton. G.H.W. Bush wins on coattails of Ronald Reagan. And finally Ronald Reagan, the least moderate of the four wins two terms in landslides.

    Please, based on this history, why ought the Republican party run a moderate?

    More recently, the epic midterm landslide for Republicans wasn't based on moderates, but on victories by Tea Party candidates, often taking out moderate Republicans in primaries.
  4. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    15 Aug '11 00:38
    Originally posted by normbenign
    "I suppose it will ultimately prove beneficial to the Democrats that the relatively moderate Republican presidential hopefuls are being weeded out."

    I find it amusing that folks who will not vote Republican want to descibe republican candidates as moderate as if that is a necessary requirement for a Republican to win.

    Look backward. G.W. Bush, a mo ...[text shortened]... but on victories by Tea Party candidates, often taking out moderate Republicans in primaries.
    GW was at least as conservative as Reagan. Probably more so.
  5. 15 Aug '11 00:44
    Originally posted by normbenign
    "I suppose it will ultimately prove beneficial to the Democrats that the relatively moderate Republican presidential hopefuls are being weeded out."

    I find it amusing that folks who will not vote Republican want to descibe republican candidates as moderate as if that is a necessary requirement for a Republican to win.

    Look backward. G.W. Bush, a mo ...[text shortened]... but on victories by Tea Party candidates, often taking out moderate Republicans in primaries.
    wittywonka and the rest of his lib friends are "intellectuals" . They know best.
  6. 15 Aug '11 01:28
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    GW was at least as conservative as Reagan. Probably more so.
    How do you, an avowed liberal/progressive define conservatism?

    Was No Child Left Behind conservative? Was adding a new entitlement, Medicare part D conservative? Was creating a new federal bureaucracy Homeland defense, and the Patriot Act conservative? Other than cutting taxes across the board, I can't think of anything conservative about Bush 43.

    He was by his own campaign slogan, "compassionate conservative" a moderate the equivalent of his Dad's "kinder and gentler".
  7. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Aug '11 01:35
    Originally posted by normbenign
    "I suppose it will ultimately prove beneficial to the Democrats that the relatively moderate Republican presidential hopefuls are being weeded out."

    I find it amusing that folks who will not vote Republican want to descibe republican candidates as moderate as if that is a necessary requirement for a Republican to win.

    Look backward. G.W. Bush, a mo ...[text shortened]... but on victories by Tea Party candidates, often taking out moderate Republicans in primaries.
    It's hard to call 2010 a tea party victory when the tea party clearly cost the GOP at least 2 seats in the Senate.
  8. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Aug '11 01:40
    Originally posted by wittywonka
    After the Iowa Straw Poll yesterday (which ended with Bachmann, Paul, and Pawlenty taking first, close second, and distant third, respectively), Pawlenty announced the withdrawal of his candidacy.

    Thoughts? Who do conservatives here favor?

    Arbitrarily speaking, remaining first-tier candidates include Perry, Romney, and Bachmann. Second-tier candid ...[text shortened]... an, and Santorum. Significant but undeclared potential alternatives include Guiliani and Palin.
    I favor Romney or Hunstman. I would likely vote for either against Obama. Same for Guiliani, but he has no chance of winning the nomination.

    If Obama were to go up against Perry or Santorum or Gingrich or Bachmann, I will hear them out with an open mind but at this point I'd probably lean Obama.

    I would absolutely vote for Obama against Paul.

    I don't know that much about Cain but his anti-Muslim comments have me a little worried about him. I do not think Palin will run.

    T-Paw has dropped out, but I'd have chosen him third in the primaries behind Romney and Hunstman.
  9. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    15 Aug '11 01:44
    Originally posted by normbenign
    How do you, an avowed liberal/progressive define conservatism?

    Was No Child Left Behind conservative? Was adding a new entitlement, Medicare part D conservative? Was creating a new federal bureaucracy Homeland defense, and the Patriot Act conservative? Other than cutting taxes across the board, I can't think of anything conservative about Bush 43. ...[text shortened]... "compassionate conservative" a moderate the equivalent of his Dad's "kinder and gentler".
    Sure NCLB was conservative; it was an attack on public schools which conservatives like you despise.

    Spending on entitlements doubled under Reagan.

    He created the Department of Veterans Affairs, one of the largest federal bureaucracies.

    Reagan would have loved the Patriot Act.

    And unlike GW, Reagan repeatedly raised taxes. In fact, the largest corporate tax hike in history was under Reagan.

    Reagan named Scalia to the Supreme Court, but also moderate conservatives Kennedy and O'Connor. GW named Alioto and Roberts.

    Of course, both of them ran up huge deficits.

    So please; the revisionist history that GW wasn't a conservative really needs to be ended.
  10. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    15 Aug '11 02:01
    Originally posted by sh76
    It's hard to call 2010 a tea party victory when the tea party clearly cost the GOP at least 2 seats in the Senate.
    Oh, I don't know.

    Mwahahahahahahah!
  11. 15 Aug '11 05:07
    Originally posted by normbenign
    How do you, an avowed liberal/progressive define conservatism?

    Was No Child Left Behind conservative? Was adding a new entitlement, Medicare part D conservative? Was creating a new federal bureaucracy Homeland defense, and the Patriot Act conservative? Other than cutting taxes across the board, I can't think of anything conservative about Bush 43. ...[text shortened]... "compassionate conservative" a moderate the equivalent of his Dad's "kinder and gentler".
    He didn't seem "compassionate conservative" when immediately after being elected, his first appointment was Ed Meese as attorney general.
  12. Standard member wittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    15 Aug '11 05:12 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    wittywonka and the rest of his lib friends are "intellectuals" . They know best.
    What the hell is your problem?

    Heaven forbid I show concern about who might be the future president of the United States. Whether I support that candidate--or whether the independent voters who will decide the elections support that candidate--is irrelevant. I have an interest in knowing and arguing about who the GOP nominee might be because frankly some second choices are better than others.
  13. 15 Aug '11 05:12
    Originally posted by sh76
    I don't know that much about Cain but his anti-Muslim comments have me a little worried about him.
    "Here's why I support de-funding Planned Parenthood, because you don't hear a lot of people talking about this, when Margaret Sanger - check my history - started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world . . . You don't see that talked that much about. . . . It's not Planned Parenthood. No, it's planned genocide. You can quote me on that." --Hermann Cain (emphasis added).
  14. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Aug '11 14:44
    Originally posted by moon1969
    "Here's why I support [b]de-funding Planned Parenthood, because you don't hear a lot of people talking about this, when Margaret Sanger - check my history - started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world . . . You don't see that talke ...[text shortened]... , it's planned genocide. You can quote me on that[/b]." --Hermann Cain (emphasis added).[/b]
    Hmmm... so he's a conspiracy nut? That's not good.

    Do you have a link, perchance?
  15. 15 Aug '11 14:46
    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/herman-cain-it-s-not-planned-parenthood