US Presidential Contenders

[Buster's Uncle]

Scorecard: How the GOP candidates fared in their 2nd debate
Associated Press
By THOMAS BEAUMONT  6 hours ago



SIMI VALLEY, California (AP) — Here's a look at how the eleven Republican candidates for president participating in the main-event debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Southern California fared on Wednesday night.

____

DONALD [Sleezebag]

The clear target of many of his rivals. Also challenged by the debate's moderators to demonstrate proficiency on foreign policy and national security. Challenged by Carly Fiorina for his recent comments about her appearance, and by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush for attributing Bush's support for an immigration overhaul to his wife's Mexican heritage.

____

JEB BUSH

Tried unsuccessfully to elicit apology from [Sleezebag] for comments about his wife. Came on strong toward the end. Won one of the few big applause moments, when he countered a criticism from [Sleezebag] of his brother, former President George W. Bush, with the line: "He kept us safe."

___


CARLY FIORINA

Critical of [Sleezebag]'s business dealings, but got ensnared in a comparison of professional records. In her first prime-time debate, Fiorina stood out, vocally asserting her ideas on foreign policy. Memorably said "women all over this country heard very clearly what Mr. [Sleezebag] said," responding to a question about [Sleezebag]'s critique of Fiorina's experience.

___

SCOTT WALKER

Was among several candidates who went after [Sleezebag] early in the debate, attacking him for projects that went into bankruptcy. The attack fell flat amid the vocal back-and-forth between the two. Walker was quiet during much of the second half of the debate, and echoed Marco Rubio during an opportunity to distinguish himself late on climate change.

___

MARCO RUBIO

Largely stayed out of the fray with [Sleezebag]. Demonstrated fluency on foreign and economic policy. Continued to season his comments with his family history as the son of a Cuban immigrant.

___

MIKE HUCKABEE

Hewed close to his social conservative base, stayed away from [Sleezebag] attacks, but also went 45 minutes without being asked a question. Insisted he would require Supreme Court nominees be abortion opponents, and defended the Kentucky county clerk who refused to grant marriage licenses to gay couples.

___

TED CRUZ

Cruz held close to his tea party base by promising to "rip to shreds this catastrophic Iranian nuclear deal," railing against federal funding for Planned Parenthood and calling his support for the confirmation of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts a mistake in light of his decisions that upheld the 2010 federal health care law.

___

BEN CARSON

The popular retired neurosurgeon notably questioned [Sleezebag]'s assertion that childhood vaccinations were a contributor to autism. He, too, was challenged by moderators to demonstrate foreign policy fluency, but was also notably left out of the questioning about the trustworthiness of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

___

RAND PAUL

Standing at far stage right, Paul had the best line of the night on the Iraq war and the fight against the Islamic State. "If you want boots on the ground, and you want them to be our sons and daughters, you got 14 other choices. There will always be a Bush or Clinton for you, if you want to go back to war in Iraq."

___

JOHN KASICH

Like Rubio, tried to steer clear of [Sleezebag] attacks. Promoted compassion for drug offenders, recommended Mother Teresa be enshrined on U.S. currency and touted and projected a cheerfulness "where everybody's actions make a huge difference in changing the world."

___

CHRIS CHRISTIE

Kept his focus on middle class voters, memorably criticizing Fiorina and [Sleezebag] arguing over the business resumes, saying struggling Americans "could care less." Projected a law-and-order image: the former prosecutor opposed legalizing marijuana when some called it a state issue.

http://news.yahoo.com/scorecard-gop-candidates-fared-2nd-debate-072543923--election.html


There's pics at the link if you care - stopped working for me before I could post.

A thought on Fiorina:  If she really wants to be president and keeps doing this well in debates, she can probably make Governor somewhere and do a hitch in the US House in whichever order works out when she loses this, provided she loses well.  Do that, Ma'am, do a good job at both, and you have met my own absolute minimum qualifications for President and I will take you seriously.  That goes for everyone, and I even tried to tell Ross Perot that a long time ago, but he turned out to not be in earshot and wouldn't have bothered with paying his dues if he'd heard.

The Pig was gravely mistaken to not bother to apologize to Bush's wife, a woman I've heard nothing against from any decent, honest people ever.  You just broke a basic social/political rule, Pig - she stays out of everything public, always, and family not involved in policy, governing or campaigning are off-limits.  Period.  A huge butthole would have issued a perfunctory, obviously insincere apology in your place, and you should be shunned for that alone.

[vonbach]

The Republicans will never actually go through with that, you know.

Either they start paying attention to their base or they wont get elected. Its why [Sleezebag] is running. Its that simple.

Cheap labor that will do anything, put up with anything, and has no power to resist anything, being a phone call away from jail and a bus trip?

What are you kidding? this isn't the 50's. Nowadays they practically throw welfare at them.
For that matter free education and whatever else they want at taxpayer expense.
The way it works is one of the family gets some crap job working off the books and the rest of the clan be brought it
goes on welfare and leeches off the system. They already for all practical purposes own the southwest.

Be careful/diplomatic if you choose to discuss this issue...

Theres no way to please liberals. They simply don't want to hear it from my experience.

[Buster's Uncle]

Mentioning liberals in reply to a caution to watch your step on a subject connected to something you'd best avoid is a grave error, young man.  Strike one.

Also, anyone who thinks Mexican are lazy don't know anything about Mexicans.  Those people WORK.

[vonbach]

Mentioning liberals

Like I said liberals just don't want to hear differing opinions.

Also, anyone who thinks Mexican are lazy don't know anything about Mexicans.  Those people WORK.

No they don't they are parasites living off the american taxpayer. Its the reason they come here.

http://www.wnd.com/2015/08/71-of-illegals-with-kids-collect-welfare/

INVASION USA
71% OF ILLEGALS WITH KIDS COLLECT WELFARE

http://thelawdictionary.org/article/why-is-it-that-illegal-aliens-get-free-food-stamps-health-insurance-and-pay-no-taxes/

Why is it that Illegal Aliens Get Free Food Stamps, Health Insurance and Pay No Taxes?
Written by James Hirby | Fact checked by The Law Dictionary staff 
Americans who are struggling to survive due to high unemployment and low wages may be asking why illegal aliens receive benefits from state and federal governments. Federal law does prevent illegal aliens from receiving benefits meant for American citizens. The only benefit that illegal aliens are allowed is emergency medical care.

Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

[Buster's Uncle]

Strike two.  I'm not going to tolerate that particular bit of tired reactionary rudeness anymore.

Also, factually incorrect, both times.  If you intend to keep up the hate speech against brown people, tell me now, and let's get your vacation started.

[vonbach]

Hate speech? Are you serious? These are facts. What are we in the USSR?

[Buster's Uncle]

I'm serious.  I don't know whether you're a racist in denial or undercover.  I think you mean well enough, and I like you just fine, but you have ideas about the world that I've seen with my own eyes turn out not to be the case at all, and your way of expressing them is without sophistication or class - and sometimes crosses the line into hate speech and brings down the whole party I'm throwing here.  I used to be -- not exactly like you, but a whole lot closer than I am now that I've learned better.

Like 75% of the internet, you want to believe that the world is really simple, when you look at it clearly - I'm the same way, but life has taught me to seek comfort elsewhere than truly understanding a complex world God painted in shades of gray.  [shrugs]

If it was just me, or if this was the sort of forum where being so very, very loudly, stridently wrong just got you argued with, it would be different.  But this is a roomful of people mostly drama-averse to the point of shyness - they just stop commenting when someone keeps shouting awful things.  You're simply not as entertaining as all of them.

Now please go cool off, cool it with the fiction about poor people you don't understand when you come back, and drop that using liberal as an insult when your host counsels caution, and I'll forget this incident, more-or-less.  Okay?

I'm trying to work with you, here - it's not like I have to.

[Dio]

Mentioning liberals in reply to a caution to watch your step on a subject connected to something you'd best avoid is a grave error, young man.  Strike one.

Also, anyone who thinks Mexican are lazy don't know anything about Mexicans.  Those people WORK.

Mentioning liberals

Like I said liberals just don't want to hear differing opinions.

Also, anyone who thinks Mexican are lazy don't know anything about Mexicans.  Those people WORK.

No they don't they are parasites living off the american taxpayer. Its the reason they come here.

http://www.wnd.com/2015/08/71-of-illegals-with-kids-collect-welfare/

INVASION USA
71% OF ILLEGALS WITH KIDS COLLECT WELFARE

http://thelawdictionary.org/article/why-is-it-that-illegal-aliens-get-free-food-stamps-health-insurance-and-pay-no-taxes/

Why is it that Illegal Aliens Get Free Food Stamps, Health Insurance and Pay No Taxes?
Written by James Hirby | Fact checked by The Law Dictionary staff 
Americans who are struggling to survive due to high unemployment and low wages may be asking why illegal aliens receive benefits from state and federal governments. Federal law does prevent illegal aliens from receiving benefits meant for American citizens. The only benefit that illegal aliens are allowed is emergency medical care.

Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

I agree that the majority of Mexican immigrants work very hard to survive in our country. I also realize that not all immigrants from this region originate in Mexico. This particular demographic, as with any particular demographic, has its share of negative individuals. The comment about Mexicans coming here as "parasites" reverbates a sterotypical generalization about individuals of this specific nationality.

[Buster's Uncle]

Really, von.  Please go cool off before you post the post you're writing.  Please.

[vonbach]

http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

Thirteen years after welfare reform, the share of immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) with a child (under age 18) using at least one welfare program continues to be very high. This is partly due to the large share of immigrants with low levels of education and their resulting low incomes — not their legal status or an unwillingness to work. The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing.

Among the findings:

In 2009 (based on data collected in 2010), 57 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal and illegal) with children (under 18) used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for native households with children.

Immigrant households’ use of welfare tends to be much higher than natives for food assistance programs and Medicaid. Their use of cash and housing programs tends to be similar to native households.

A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are American citizens. But even households with children comprised entirely of immigrants (no U.S.-born children) still had a welfare use rate of 56 percent in 2009.

Immigrant households with children used welfare programs at consistently higher rates than natives, even before the current recession. In 2001, 50 percent of all immigrant households with children used at least one welfare program, compared to 32 percent for natives.

Households with children with the highest welfare use rates are those headed by immigrants from the Dominican Republic (82 percent), Mexico and Guatemala (75 percent), and Ecuador (70 percent). Those with the lowest use rates are from the United Kingdom (7 percent), India (19 percent), Canada (23 percent), and Korea (25 percent).

The states where immigrant households with children have the highest welfare use rates are Arizona (62 percent); Texas, California, and New York (61 percent); Pennsylvania (59 percent); Minnesota and Oregon (56 percent); and Colorado (55 percent).

We estimate that 52 percent of households with children headed by legal immigrants used at least one welfare program in 2009, compared to 71 percent for illegal immigrant households with children. Illegal immigrants generally receive benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children.

Illegal immigrant households with children primarily use food assistance and Medicaid, making almost no use of cash or housing assistance. In contrast, legal immigrant households tend to have relatively high use rates for every type of program.

They shouldn't even be here on these programs in the first place.

[Dio]

I fail to understand the need to argue about the legality of a group with a wide variety of circumstances that brought them to this country. The sweeping generalizations about this topic, as mentioned above by BUncle, fail to take into account the unique circumstances inherent to each case.

[Green1]

Von, if Canada spoke nothing but French and had jobs paying 40 dollars an hour, no skills necessary, no citizenship really needed, and the US had nothing but 3-4 abusive employers to choose from A LOT of folks would hike across that border in a hurry. There would even be American communities there, there would be so many folks.

As far as them getting healthcare, this should be okay for everyone as a human right. Welfare is what a civilized society does. It should be universal along with housing. Either that or a certain amount per month for everyone for just survival. But, the AMA and insurance companies won't have it unless you shut them down. And, the landlords want others to work so they do not have to.

What's with all the vitriol? These people are taking jobs a lot do not like. Farm hand? That is some tough, hard, hot, sweaty work.

Maybe if the labor pool disappeared, though, through MORE welfare MORE rent controls, employers would have to treat folks a bit better instead of cattle and the crap jobs would disappear.

Now.... INVADING and ANNEXING Mexico, that might make sense from an evil sort of view and better that some theocracy in a desert.

[Rusty Edge]

Watching the debate, I saw the frontrunner in a new light.

Normally, as a candidate he's been the posterior end of a digestive tract towards anybody who dared to criticize him. After doing so, Bush, Carson, and Fiorina all received stump speech tongue lashings the following day. There's something to be said for a guy as a potential national leader who hits back at the aggressor twice as hard. I can understand that.

Last night, rather than pointing that out, and asking his competitors if they are slow to understand that, and standing by what he said, he WEASLED! Almost as if Rand Paul had gotten through to him with the "Jr. High" comment that he was in the wrong and not acting presidential. He didn't act like a man and accept full responsibility for his words and actions and deliver proper apologies, either. There's  something to be said, too, for a guy as a potential national leader who doesn't shirk responsibility. Better yet, there's something to be said for a guy as a potential national leader who gets his facts straight before he strikes.

I can understand a consistent posterior end of a digestive tract, and I can respect somebody who accepts full responsibility for their words and deeds, but a WEASEL?!!
We already have Hillary! We don't need any more weasels. We need an open season on weasels.

[Buster's Uncle]

I think you're too hard on Mrs. Clinton -but only somewhat- or I'd just say total agreement.

[Rusty Edge]

She's the only politician I hate. I try to be up front about that.

Listen to/read her statements about her foolish private e-mail account. Mia Culpa? Apologize?  Neva! Hedge. Obfuscate. Trivialize. Joke.
Weasel. Weasel. Weasel.  The lawyer can't help herself.

She's no Truman Democrat.