Perry in 2012?

[bush_cheney2004]

He could have used his bully pulpit towards the various ethnic minorities to convince them to join America. Stop having babies out of wedlock. Get jobs. Learn f***** English. Stop dropping out. I.e. the way he got ahead.

Huh? Do you somehow think these issues don't apply to non "ethnic minorities"?

You must be joking.....

[jbg]

Huh? Do you somehow think these issues don't apply to non "ethnic minorities"?

You must be joking.....

My point if obvious. Obama's voice is far louder with the minorities, that contain more or less permanent underclasses.

So, what are you babbling about?

Edited November 14, 2011 by jbg

[bush_cheney2004]

My point if obvious. Obama's voice is far louder with the minorities, that contain more or less permanent underclasses.

So, what are you babbling about?

So who is going to be the "loud voice" for all those other non-"minority" and largest population of the "underclass"? Can't Obama do that too....remember, his mother was not a "minority". Sheeeeesh.....your point is silly.

[jbg]

So who is going to be the "loud voice" for all those other non-"minority" and largest population of the "underclass"? Can't Obama do that too....remember, his mother was not a "minority". Sheeeeesh.....your point is silly.

Are your reading skills so limited you an only read one-half of my post. The majority has some under-class people but not a permanent underclass with the prevailing levels of pathologies as in some minority communities.

[kimmy]

If Sarah Palin's inability to articulate "The Bush Doctrine" was bad, Herman Cain's inability to recall what American troops were doing this summer can only be called an unmitigated disaster.

I feel bad for laughing at this; a kinder person would feel pity for him. Hopefully some more ass-grabbing victims will come forward and distract people from this debacle. The happiest man in America right now must be Rick Perry, because he's no longer the dumbest guy in the race.

Give it up, pizza-man. It's down to Mitt and Newt.

-k

[Bonam]

I dunno. I dont really see any skills Obama COULD have had that would have made much of a difference. I think you will find that the near 50:50 partisan divide makes it impossible for ANYONE to really accomplish much in that position.

Well, democrats did happen to control both houses of congress for the first part of Obama's term. They coulda "accomplished" just about anything they wanted.

[Bonam]

If Sarah Palin's inability to articulate "The Bush Doctrine" was bad, Herman Cain's inability to recall what American troops were doing this summer can only be called an unmitigated disaster.

...

I feel bad for laughing at this; a kinder person would feel pity for him. Hopefully some more ass-grabbing victims will come forward and distract people from this debacle. The happiest man in America right now must be Rick Perry, because he's no longer the dumbest guy in the race.

Hmm, just watched it. Didn't think it was that bad. He took a minute to try to remember, but then managed to talk about things that at least had some relation to the issue at hand. He spoke in vague generalities of course but I don't think it was nearly as bad as Perry's gaffe. Sorry. Oops.

Edited November 15, 2011 by Bonam

[msj]

Well, with this video I think it's safe to assume that Perry is done:

Oh, and Happy Holidays to you, Mr. Perry.

Edited December 9, 2011 by msj

[GostHacked]

Well, with this video I think it's safe to assume that Perry is done:

Oh, and Happy Holidays to you, Mr. Perry.

I guess he does not mind gays in the military as long as they are not open about it. This almost belongs in the American/Canadian politician/religion thread. NO of course religion is not THAT big of a factor in the USA.

[Guest American Woman]

I guess he does not mind gays in the military as long as they are not open about it. This almost belongs in the American/Canadian politician/religion thread. NO of course religion is not THAT big of a factor in the USA.

Since when does Perry represent what's what "in the USA?" How about I find one Canadian politician and decide to base what's what in Canada on that politician? That would be real accurate, eh?

[GostHacked]

Since when does Perry represent what's what "in the USA?" How about I find one Canadian politician and decide to base what's what in Canada on that politician? That would be real accurate, eh?

Hey go for it. You really think it's going to hurt my feelings if you do? Perry wears his religion on his sleeve openly.

[Guest American Woman]

Hey go for it. You really think it's going to hurt my feelings if you do? Perry wears his religion on his sleeve openly.

Ummmm. I would hope to God it wouldn't hurt your feelings. I thought you'd be able to see the ignorance of it if I did, but perhaps not, so I'll elaborate: Perry wearing his religion on his sleeve has nothing to do with "how big a factor religion is in the USA," while it has everything to do with how big a factor is is with HIM; and your putting his feelings on the entire US has nothing to do with hurting my feelings and everything to do with the ignorance of it.

[dre]

Well, democrats did happen to control both houses of congress for the first part of Obama's term. They coulda "accomplished" just about anything they wanted.

Obama cant tell folks in congress or the senate how to vote. Not democrats OR republicans. They are directed by their campaign donors, and by voters in their districts.

This is why the US government has not solved a single major problem in recent modern history. Whether its defecits, healthcare, border security, social security, etc etc

When all is said and done... a whole lot will get said and nothing will get done.

[kimmy]

Perry wearing his religion on his sleeve has nothing to do with "how big a factor religion is in the USA," while it has everything to do with how big a factor is is with HIM;

That Rick Perry's campaign team believe this is a successful political strategy (and make no mistake, this is a strategy) is a statement about more than just Rick Perry. It is also a statement about how influential the "Christian right" voters are in the Iowa caucus (and some of the other upcoming ones as well-- South Carolina will also be heavily influenced by the "Christian right".)

-k

[Guest American Woman]

That Rick Perry's campaign team believe this is a successful political strategy (and make no mistake, this is a strategy) is a statement about more than just Rick Perry.

Sure it is - it's a statement about his campaign team too and what they perceive as important and/or their attempt to 'cover all the bases.'

It is also a statement about how influential the "Christian right" voters are in the Iowa caucus (and some of the other upcoming ones as well-- South Carolina will also be heavily influenced by the "Christian right".)

Regardless of whether or not that's true, Iowa and South Carolina don't speak for "the USA;" what's important in those two states is not synonymous with what's "an important factor in the USA."

[Guest Manny]

Seems like it's important enough for Rick Perry, and he has many supporters. Of course it's not the WHOLE America. But who can speak for an entire country? There are differing views among the general public. SOme are accepting of gays, some are not. Which one represents "America"? Hard to say.

But perhaps you could say it's the leader and the policies. What if Perry becomes the President? Then, does it represent America? Or look at the policies or attitudes about gay marriage, different in some states verses others. Some allow, some don't allow. Which one represents America? It's only fair to say they both do, because there is no unified vision or attitude that everyone holds in complete agreement.

So you cannot categorically deny the anti-gay factions exist.

[Guest American Woman]

Seems like it's important enough for Rick Perry, and he has many supporters.

I doubt he has enough supporters to win the GOP nomination, but being of importance to him and his supporters is not synonymous with being an important factor in the USA; furthermore, his supporters don't necessarily support everything he thinks is important.

Of course it's not the WHOLE America. But who can speak for an entire country?

No one, which is why it's ludicrous to use Perry as proof of what's an important factor in the USA.

There are differing views among the general public. SOme are accepting of gays, some are not. Which one represents "America"? Hard to say.

But perhaps you could say it's the leader and the policies. What if Perry becomes the President? Then, does it represent America? Or look at the policies or attitudes about gay marriage, different in some states verses others. Some allow, some don't allow. Which one represents America? It's only fair to say they both do, because there is no unified vision or attitude that everyone holds in complete agreement.

So you cannot categorically deny the anti-gay factions exist.

Just because something exists doesn't mean it's an "important, influencing factor in the USA." Religion is not an important factor when voters go to the polls - the economy, terrorism, taxes, the budget, immigration, health care, etc. are important issues, with the economy by far being the most important.

Edited December 10, 2011 by American Woman

[Guest Manny]

Just because something exists doesn't mean it's an "important, influencing factor in the USA." Religion is not an important factor when voters go to the polls - the economy, terrorism, taxes, the budget, immigration, health care, etc. are important issues, with the economy by far being the most important.

Pat Robertson demonstrated that religion, and morality very much does matter. He helped to create the moral majority, ultimately bolstering Ronald Reagan to victory.

So many people would disagree with you, in the bible belt. And they are not silent now, they have a voice and they seek to vote, based mainly on their moral beliefs. Probably none of them voted for Obama. The victory depends on who can get their voter base to come out and vote, vs who doesn't bother out of complacency. This is what Perry is probably trying to do.

[olp1fan]

no politician in canada is wackier than most republicans

[olp1fan]

Regardless of whether or not that's true, Iowa and South Carolina don't speak for "the USA;" what's important in those two states is not synonymous with what's "an important factor in the USA."

lets see here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_status_in_the_United_States_by_state

28 states have banned same sex marriage

7 states have legalized same sex marriage

9 states it is not legal

A few are proposing legislation ... a few are in limbo in the courts

Seems to me U.S doesn't want same sex marriage legalized

religion is playing a huge role

if I were an American I'd be embarrassed cause of this

Edited December 10, 2011 by olp1fan

[Guest American Woman]

Pat Robertson demonstrated that religion, and morality very much does matter. He helped to create the moral majority, ultimately bolstering Ronald Reagan to victory.

If you think Pat Robertson represents what's important to most Americans, you are really, really off base - and for the record, "religion" and "morality" aren't mutually exclusive by any means.

So many people would disagree with you, in the bible belt.

I'm not talking about the Bible Belt; the comments I've responded to aren't about the Bible Belt - they are about "the USA." The Bible Belt does not represent the US.

And they are not silent now, they have a voice and they seek to vote, based mainly on their moral beliefs.

Yes, they will. But again, what they think is of no more importance than what the rest of the U.S. thinks, which, btw, encompasses the majority. The Bible Belt is a minority of the U.S.

Probably none of them voted for Obama.

This shows how out of touch with reality you are; of course Obama got votes in the Bible Belt.

The victory depends on who can get their voter base to come out and vote, vs who doesn't bother out of complacency. This is what Perry is probably trying to do.

Whatever Perry is trying to do, it's proof of nothing other than what Perry believes - and it doesn't appear to be working for him. But as I said, yes, he is going to try to get the support of Religious Right as part of his strategy, but that doesn't mean it's any more important than other group/organization/minority/whatever whose support he, and the other candidates, are going after - and it doesn't mean it's an important factor in the US. Is it an important factor in the Bible Belt? Sure, but "Bible Belt" and "the USA" are not by any means synonymous.

[Guest Manny]

Is it an important factor in the Bible Belt? Sure, but "Bible Belt" and "the USA" are not by any means synonymous.

I already said the same thing. It's not a monoculture, by any means. But what is synonymous? If we count the number of states that disallow gay marriage, well...

See my view in general, out of touch with reality though I may be, is that there are places like California where it's much more accepted, and places like Texas where it's not. Maybe those states are not good specific examples but it doesn't matter. Better to say, it draws along lines of Liberal and Conservative. Most Liberals would support it, most Conservatives not. And that is where the struggle always lies, the winner in a democracy being whoever gets people off the couch.

[Bonam]

Obama cant tell folks in congress or the senate how to vote. Not democrats OR republicans. They are directed by their campaign donors, and by voters in their districts.

Yes, I'm aware. Nonetheless, when a party controls the presidency as well as both houses of congress, they can often do quite a lot. Obama squandered that opportunity, by trying to achieve bipartisan compromises during the early part of his term. That was certainly a noble goal, but naive. He should have tried to implement as much of his agenda as possible while the Democrats had the power to do so.

[Bonam]

As for Perry's "I'm religious" ad, that's just downright loathsome. Oh where are you non-religious-fanatic conservatives in America?

I guess I should be happy I can't vote in the US yet. Zealots or socialists, what a crappy choice.

[dre]

As for Perry's "I'm religious" ad, that's just downright loathsome. Oh where are you non-religious-fanatic conservatives in America?

I guess I should be happy I can't vote in the US yet. Zealots or socialists, what a crappy choice.

What about Romney! He cant campaign on religion because he believes Americans are the real israelites and that the natives have dark skin because of what cain did to able Hes too nutty even for catholics and protestents. Newt and Ron Paul are religious but dont seem to go on and on about it like zealots either.