American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems

[mikal83]

supersingle said:

Well yes, there's been lots of talk of amnesty but not much talk of enforcing the borders. I've read that Bush has emerged as pro-amnesty. That effectively ignores the rule of law. That's quite something for a supposed right winger. More like something you'd expect from the internationalist left, who don't believe in the concept of the nation state.

The are lots are Democratic controlled (sanctuary) cities that are violating federal law by turning a blind eye to illegal immigrants. You'd think that would be worth talking about, no?

As for the left not existing in the US? Really? The MSM and education are pretty entrenched in leftism no? Do you think Obama (voted in by the US public) is right wing? Is gay marriage a conservative notion? The left are doing very nicely in the US by my reckoning.

SS, quit before you dig a deeper hole. You haven't a clue mate.

[supersingle]

mikal83 said:

SS, quit before you dig a deeper hole. You haven't a clue mate.

What is your argument? We're talking about US politics, feel free to join us.

[unrepentant]

Wasting your breath Mikal, best to ignore and move on.

Good article in USA Today this morning.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/electi...

Meanwhile that old left winger Ruperp Murdoch lays into Trump for his wrong headedness on immigration.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/12/politics/rupert-murd...

[supersingle]

Scott Walker would be my first choice, if i could vote.

The likes of Bush just reek of corporatism, the absolute worst of the right wing. Walker should be able to out 'blue collar' Clinton, assuming she can find her way out of her rope cordon

[Alfa numeric]

supersingle said:

unrepentant said:

supersingle said:

If they're not then Trump will not capitalise on his policy. The point is that the left had placed an embargo on even talking about illegal immigration. Trump has broken that restriction, which is a good thing for democracy.

Sorry mate but you're talking nothing but utter and complete bks. I don't know where you get your info from but it's all garbage.

For starters "The Left" basically don't exist in the USA, the democrats are pretty much to the right of the tories on most issues. Secondly far more illegal immigrants have been deported under Obama than ever were under Bush. Thirdly, far from any "embargoes" on talking about illegal immigration it has been front and center for the past 4 years amongst all parties. Have you not heard about the amnesty bills and the president's executive action on amnesty for children of illegals? You didn't know that the DHS has trained thousands of new officers to enforce new policies on immigration? You haven't heard Rubio and Bush and Jindal and Hillary talk about immigration?

Well yes, there's been lots of talk of amnesty but not much talk of enforcing the borders. I've read that Bush has emerged as pro-amnesty. That effectively ignores the rule of law. That's quite something for a supposed right winger. More like something you'd expect from the internationalist left, who don't believe in the concept of the nation state.

The are lots are Democratic controlled (sanctuary) cities that are violating federal law by turning a blind eye to illegal immigrants. You'd think that would be worth talking about, no?

As for the left not existing in the US? Really? The MSM and education are pretty entrenched in leftism no? Do you think Obama (voted in by the US public) is right wing? Is gay marriage a conservative notion? The left are doing very nicely in the US by my reckoning.

Interesting article by the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33509896

And let's not forget what Trump said that caused the accusations of racism:

Donald Trump said:

When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems to us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

[rovermorris999]

Just what the US needs.....not.
http://www.capx.co/hillary-clinton-promises-higher...

[unrepentant]

rovermorris999 said:

Just what the US needs.....not.
http://www.capx.co/hillary-clinton-promises-higher...

You quote CAPX as fact? It's a right wing rag and this is their interpretation and highly biased opinion of what was said.

The biggest economic issue facing us at the moment is the lack of growth in middle class incomes. While the economy is doing very well, million of new jobs have been created and those at the top have seen incomes grow dramatically those in the middle have seen wage stagnation. That needs to be addressed and Hillary will address it. If that means the closing of loopholes so that the mega rich pay their way then so much the better. I believe your conservative government is following the same strategy.

[Esseesse]

I pay only half attention to the election in the USA, but enough to know who many of the candidates are.

Could someone explain to me, it seems to me like the democrats are quite organised and only have a handful of potential candidates, whereas republicans have lots of people battling each other to become the candidate. Is this correct or just a false impression I've gained?

[mikal83]

Esseesse said:

I pay only half attention to the election in the USA, but enough to know who many of the candidates are.

Could someone explain to me, it seems to me like the democrats are quite organised and only have a handful of potential candidates, whereas republicans have lots of people battling each other to become the candidate. Is this correct or just a false impression I've gained?

Its always been like, at least for many years.... why? Perhaps its an ego "I'm a great CEO.....(Trump etc), so how difficult could it be running a country.

[rovermorris999]

unrepentant said:

You quote CAPX as fact? It's a right wing rag and this is their interpretation and highly biased opinion of what was said.

The biggest economic issue facing us at the moment is the lack of growth in middle class incomes. While the economy is doing very well, million of new jobs have been created and those at the top have seen incomes grow dramatically those in the middle have seen wage stagnation. That needs to be addressed and Hillary will address it. If that means the closing of loopholes so that the mega rich pay their way then so much the better. I believe your conservative government is following the same strategy.

I'm glad you know better than Diana Furchtgott-Roth but that's the internet for you. How about countering the arguments raised there? CapX is hardly a rag, some good quality contributors on there.

[unrepentant]

Esseesse said:

I pay only half attention to the election in the USA, but enough to know who many of the candidates are.

Could someone explain to me, it seems to me like the democrats are quite organised and only have a handful of potential candidates, whereas republicans have lots of people battling each other to become the candidate. Is this correct or just a false impression I've gained?

Last time round we had a sitting president being elected so no challengers. The GOP put up a lot of no hopers with big egos (many of whom are having another go) before picking the least awful one in Romney. The same thing will happen this time and it will probably come down to Bush or Walker v Hillary. There are some dems who might have made a run but they see Hilaary as pretty unstoppable so decided to keep their powder dry. If Hillary doesn't win this time (she will) I would expect a more crowded Dem field in 2020.

[DJRC]

supersingle said:

mikal83 said:

SS, quit before you dig a deeper hole. You haven't a clue mate.

What is your argument? We're talking about US politics, feel free to join us.

Gay marriage and the liberal emancipation movement as a whole - certainly in the States - is a conservative/right wing/Republican historical standpoint yes. It's in the very foundations of the Republican Party.

As befits the current level of absolute ignorance over history amongst the general populations and especially amongst those who pretend to know better - traditionally conservatives/right wing have invariably been considerably more liberal than left wing political parties.

[Halb]

Usual twaddle for GOP type over the Iran deal, and Clinton making stupid noises too, in symbiosis with both the Saudis and the Israelis.

[unrepentant]

DJRC said:

As befits the current level of absolute ignorance over history amongst the general populations and especially amongst those who pretend to know better - traditionally conservatives/right wing have invariably been considerably more liberal than left wing political parties.

You're talking ancient history DJ? The right in it's modern guise has been anything but liberal on just about all social issues. All of the progress in areas such as womens rights, gay rights, the rights of immigrants, the rights of non whites etc.. has come about in the teeth of rabid opposition from the conservative right. Many (nearly all) of the current GOP candidates would seek to overturn all or part of Roe v Wade, return gay rights to states and seek to remove voting rights from African Americans. Hardly progressive.

[Mermaid]

I wish they would decide by committee for one term.

[supersingle]

unrepentant said:

DJRC said:

As befits the current level of absolute ignorance over history amongst the general populations and especially amongst those who pretend to know better - traditionally conservatives/right wing have invariably been considerably more liberal than left wing political parties.

You're talking ancient history DJ? The right in it's modern guise has been anything but liberal on just about all social issues. All of the progress in areas such as womens rights, gay rights, the rights of immigrants, the rights of non whites etc.. has come about in the teeth of rabid opposition from the conservative right. Many (nearly all) of the current GOP candidates would seek to overturn all or part of Roe v Wade, return gay rights to states and seek to remove voting rights from African Americans. Hardly progressive.

Perhaps you'd like to name all these GOP candidates who'd like to remove the vote from black people.

Do we need to remind you that it was the Republicans that supported the Civil Rights Act despite opposition from Democrats? The Jim Crow laws came from Democrat legislators. The left have always been the party of division: pitting one group against another and benefiting from tension between them. It doesn't matter if it's race,sex or class they're sowing grievances and stirring things up to their advantage.

The right believe in the rule of law. Everyone is equal before the law.

[unrepentant]

supersingle said:

Perhaps you'd like to name all these GOP candidates who'd like to remove the vote from black people.

Do we need to remind you that it was the Republicans that supported the Civil Rights Act despite opposition from Democrats? The Jim Crow laws came from Democrat legislators. law.

The political parties bear little resemblance to where the were in the Jim Crow era, that's why I said it was ancient history. Winston Churchill was once a Liberal you know...

If you knew anything about American politics you would know that there are many red states that are trying to push through voter ID laws that are aimed specifically at denying the vote to people of color because those people don't vote republican!

[supersingle]

unrepentant said:

The political parties bear little resemblance to where the were in the Jim Crow era, that's why I said it was ancient history. Winston Churchill was once a Liberal you know...

If you knew anything about American politics you would know that there are many red states that are trying to push through voter ID laws that are aimed specifically at denying the vote to people of color because those people don't vote republican!

Voter ID is to prevent voting fraud. Why are you so condescending to minorities? If they are legal citizens then they'll have ID like anyone else. Are you saying illegal immigrants should have a vote?

How about that list of Republican candidates who want to take the vote away from black people?

[DJRC]

God spare me from ppl who think history = the last 50yrs and anything before that is "ancient ".

This is especially true for the States where in a historians eyes they don't have any ancient bloody history! It is the continual arrogant conceit of man that every generation thinks only what it thinks is "how it is". It is the luxury of historians to point out that such a view is cods wallop

The founding principles of the Republican Party and most of it's greatest members have been very much about social equality. That in the last 20yrs a bunch of religious loonies have managed to corrupt a major part of it's processes does not in any way change history nor fact. It does however damn with miserly faint praise though who would stand to represent that party in failing to address such weaknesses. There should be some fking embarrassed Republic Party figures at their lack of strategic management. You would have thought fat Chris for one would have had the balls and brains to call them out.

[unrepentant]

supersingle said:

unrepentant said:

The political parties bear little resemblance to where the were in the Jim Crow era, that's why I said it was ancient history. Winston Churchill was once a Liberal you know...

If you knew anything about American politics you would know that there are many red states that are trying to push through voter ID laws that are aimed specifically at denying the vote to people of color because those people don't vote republican!

Voter ID is to prevent voting fraud. Why are you so condescending to minorities? If they are legal citizens then they'll have ID like anyone else. Are you saying illegal immigrants should have a vote?

How about that list of Republican candidates who want to take the vote away from black people?

Ok, you're just an Idiot. I can't be bothered to argue with someone who pontificates on something about which you clearly know nothing.