68
   

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

 
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 10:45 am
@Ticomaya,
I was still able to appreciate the joke in my own limey way.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 11:03 am
@izzythepush,
Is the limey way, Grope without Hope?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 12:00 pm
@izzythepush,
But Mr Cain is not accused of groping anybody as far as I'm aware. Didn't he simply speak to those ladies in a manner which they are not used to? I know what GOP signifies izzy. I'm more American than most on here.

It was a smear. And there's a certain sour grapes to it. It shows how low Herman's enemies will stoop for a snicker. And what about the white guy passing by. That's where I thought the joke was. As if he thought there's something despicable about a grope. He does look a bit of a gump you must admit.
hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 12:02 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

But Mr Cain is not accused of groping anybody as far as I'm aware. Didn't he simply speak to those ladies in a manner which they are not used to?


Right, which according to the new standards that the feminists are trying to impose that alone is a high crime against women. You will note that almost all of the journalism assumes that the feminists standards are America's standards, which is far from the truth. The generally liberal media is in collusion with the neo-liberal feminists here, and the rest of the media has been coerced into staying quiet. Where the left wants to go is represented as fait accompli, both by the left and by the media. You have seen in the sex threads Firefly going to that well over and over again, claiming that her standards on sexual conduct are now the law, those who dont agree are the barbaric few, and we cant do anything about the new standards (which she will claim as long as she can get away with it are not actually new standards at all). We also should be ignored. The truth that she does not want to talk about is that a large number of people dont agree with the feminists standards, because the hope is that we will die off and the young will accept that the truth is what the feminists tell them it is. Everything that the feminists dont like is called a "myth".
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 12:21 pm
@hawkeye10,
Hey hawk-- Coronation Street had a scene involving Rosie being kidnapped by Mad John. After that was over, she was persuaded, eventually, to give an interview with the local press by Sally's new boyfriend who got his foot in the door after she kicked Kevin out for shagging a baby into Tyrone's wife (now deceased, as is Mad John). Sally and Kevin are Rosie's Mom and Pop. Viz has just been convicted of one of the three murders Mad John had committed. They were married. So it's a current human interest story in the fictional context.

But when the paper came out the headline read "ROSIE- being abducted made me feel sexy." Interesting headline for the scriptwriters to have chosen eh?
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 02:28 pm
Do republicans have a problem with bringing science into our economic system?

0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Nov, 2011 08:04 pm
The donations allegedly flowing into the cain cash box after his sexual innuendos or whatever they were surfaced are from men who do or want to do the same.

That moron has worn out his welcome with his stupid apples and oranges
theme.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 04:31 am
@plainoldme,
Quote:
The donations allegedly flowing into the cain cash box after his sexual innuendos or whatever they were surfaced are from men who do or want to do the same.


If you was more intelligent pom I would attempt to explain what an anti-woman remark that is. As it is I'll content myself with saying that it is suprising that a supporter of teaching evolution in schools turns out to be a silly, puritanical prig.

Obviously you have no coherent definition of "teaching evolution in schools". It is a mere phrase to you.

Take a look at Pagan, Hindu, Polynesian, Neolithic and Japanese art from periods before Christian influence. You've churched yourself.

And your expression "or whatever they were" admits that you don't know what you are talking about and thus that you have no excuse for using the term "sexual innuendos" apart from how thrilling you find it.

Some of us would prefer if you didn't talk dirty to us without any reason. Notice how you use "allegedly" for the donations but not for the sexual innuendos.

And you have "students"? Ye Gods!!
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 09:08 am
RJB asked me a while ago to write about Issue #2 here in Ohio. Have been busy and the election is tomorrow, but here are some thoughts.

It's a big deal, and I've been a bit surprised at how much attention it's gotten outside of Ohio.

Short version, SB 5 was pushed through the state government but was deeply unpopular. It has to do with whether collective bargaining is allowed.

It's been pretty effectively cast as teachers, policemen, firemen etc. on one side (anti-SB 5), and Gov. Kasich on the other (pro-SB 5).

A grassroots movement got enough signatures to put SB 5 on the ballot -- to get people to vote on it. (Referendum.) It's on the ballot as Issue 2. (A "no" vote on Issue 2 is also a "no" vote on SB 5. If Issue 2 fails, then SB 5 is defunct.)

When RJB wrote to me, my own short version was that I see far more "No on 2/ No on SB 5" signs than "yes on 2" signs. And my general feeling was that Issue 2 won't pass.

This is both on the merits (more people want collective bargaining and/ or want to support policemen etc.), and a general middle finger to Kasich. This was a power play from him and even many of the people who voted for him didn't like it at all.

Especially in terms of the latter, this is a referendum not only on this specific issue but on the Tea Party wave of Republicans in the 2010 election. (That's when Kasich was elected, but he's now very unpopular*.)

Anyway, I was reminded of all of this when I saw this article:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/poll-ohio-set-to-vote-big-against-kasichs-anti-public-employee-union-law.php

So the polls seem to line up pretty well with my impressions. We'll see, tomorrow.

*From the TPM article:

Quote:
Kasich’s own approval mirrors those numbers, with only 33% approval and 57% disapproval. Kasich was elected in the 2010 Republican wave, defeating incumbent Democrat Ted Strickland by a 49%-47% margin. However, when asked if they could vote again, the respondents in this poll chose Strickland by a 55%-37% margin.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 09:45 am
@sozobe,
The Columbus Dispatch had printed some examples as well some time ago.
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 09:49 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Examples of?

Their Republican bias? There's some of that, for sure.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 09:50 am
@sozobe,
Those numbers suggest that a lot of voters don't know what they are doing. Mr Kasich should go round to the 10% and put some extra syrup on their comforters.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 05:59 pm
There will be a mayoral election in San Francisco. I am in no way able to come up with a connection to this thread with that news, but I needed to find a place to post about it.
The contest in liberal SF will feature something like 15 candidates. In order to win, one of them must win 50% + 1 of the votes.
In order to avoid runoffs, voters will select their 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices tomorrow. The votes will be tallied and whoever ends up getting fewest 1st place votes will have those votes redistributed to whomever is 2nd and 3rd on each voter's ballots.
For example, if Cyclo went with candidate #16 as his first choice followed by #5 as his 2nd pick and #8 as his 3rd, his vote would go to #5. But if #5 ended up at the bottom, his vote would move to #8.
To some extent there is a bit of logic beyond the financial cost of runoffs. Single issue candidates need to reach out to a broader base of potential supporters. A tradeoff is that candidates, in campaigns, might be wary of criticizing an opponent for fear of offending those not in his/her base.
This has been tried before but not in a place as visible as SF.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 06:04 pm
@realjohnboy,
Quote:

To some extent there is a bit of logic beyond the financial cost of runoffs. Single issue candidates need to reach out to a broader base of potential supporters.


Yup, this is what all the candidates go on about - you can't simply try and appeal to one group, if you do so you will lose. It's very hard for a traditional 'machine' to win such an election.

In the case of Jean Quan, embattled mayor of Oakland, she won specifically due to this system - she would have been easily defeated amongst the old system. From her wikipedia page:

Quote:
2010 Oakland mayoral election

Oakland's 2010 election was held under the city's new instant-runoff voting or ranked choice voting ballot system, which allows voters to indicate their first, second, and third choices of candidate. More than 120,000 voters participated in the largest turnout for a Mayor's race in recent memory. Though ranked choice voting is promoted as a way to reduce mud-slinging between the candidates, Quan paid for several negative hit pieces on her closest rival.[11] The top three finishers among a field of 10 candidates were Quan, Don Perata, and Rebecca Kaplan.[12] In the initial tally on election night, Perata led Quan, 40,342 to 29,266 but did not have a majority of the 1st-place votes. The votes were then re-tallied by eliminating Kaplan, the third-place finisher, and allocating her votes among Perata and Quan. Three weeks later, the Alameda Registrar of voters declared Quan the winner with 53,897 votes from 119,607 voters (45.06% support).[13] Previous Mayors Jerry Brown and Ron Dellums were elected with majority support of the voters—Brown with 58.93% and 63.54% of the vote; Dellums with 50.18%.


Traditional types hate it, those who represent minority groups love it.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 07:34 pm
So one of Cain's "victim's" comes out - by name, today - with accusations against him from a decade or more ago.
I am no fan of Herman Cain.
She, now 50 or so, worked in an NRA related affiliate when she was in her late 30's. She was let go after a year for an unexplained reason. She had met Cain at a conference in Chicago and she supposedly called him in an effort to secure another job at the NRA. She travels to D.C. and meets him in a hotel bar. Then they went to a restaurant. In a cab back to the hotel, she claims he "groped" her.
Something stinks here.
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 08:13 pm
@realjohnboy,
Am I right in thinking there is much more chance that this stuff is coming from a GOP competitor? Surely the Dems would hold onto something like this until after the repub nomination was confirmed? Keep your powder dry and all that.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 08:14 pm
@realjohnboy,
Quote:
Something stinks here.

Why?

This woman seems to have come forward mainly to lend credence to the allegations made by the other women, who are less free to discuss how Cain behaved toward them. It helps to establish a pattern of behavior on his part that he's been denying.

It seems she mainly wants him to admit that he did make inappropriate advances toward women in the context of employment situations. It probably would be a good idea for him to do that, and make some sort of apology for his past behavior, and acknowledge it is wrong and inappropriate in those situations, and then move on to discuss other issues. It's his denials that create a problem for him, and, if this was a pattern of behavior for him, still more women may come forward. If he admits he behaved inappropriately, he may be able to close this issue sooner rather than later.

Quote:
November 7, 2011
Sharon Bialek accuses Cain of "sexually inappropriate" behavior
By Corbett B. Daly

A Chicago woman accused Herman Cain on Monday of trying to get sexual favors more than a decade ago in exchange for his help finding her a new job just after she had lost her post at an arm of the restaurant association he was then running.

The woman, Sharon Bialek, is the fourth woman who has accused Cain of sexually inappropriate behavior in the late 1990s and the first to go public with her charges. She outlined her story at a high-profile New York City press conference at the Friars Club.

"I want you, Mr. Cain, to come clean," she said with her attorney, Gloria Allred, at her side. Allred is known for her media savvy and for representing women who have had legal issues with the rich and powerful.

Bialek said Cain put his hand under her skirt and pushed her head toward his crotch after a dinner together in 1997 after she asked to meet him to discuss ways he might be able to help her find employment. She said he backed away after she asked him to stop. Her boyfriend at the time on Monday issued a statement released by Allred confirming that she told him about the incident at the time. Allred did not release the boyfriend's name.

Bialek does not plan to sell her story or file a lawsuit against the Republican candidate for the White House.

"Just admit what you did. Admit you were inappropriate to people. And then move forward. America is in a horrible turmoil as we all know. We need a leader who can set an example which exemplifies the standards of a good person and moral character. Mr. Cain, I implore you, make this right. So that you and the country can move forward and focus on the real issues at hand," Bialek said.

She said she was let go from the National Restaurant Association's Educational Foundation in the summer of 1997 and asked to meet him for coffee a month or so later in Washington, to ask for his assistance with her job search.

She said she booked herself a room at a hotel two blocks from the White House and when she checked in, it was upgraded to a suite by Cain. They went to dinner at an Italian restaurant and after dinner Cain made unwanted advances toward Bialek in the car.

When she asked what he was doing, she said he responded by rhetorically asking her: "You want a job, right?"

She said Cain stopped when she made it clear she was not interested.

Bialek said she saw Cain for the first time since the incident last month at a Chicago Tea Party event and asked the candidate if he remembered her.

"I guess he wanted to see if he was going to be man enough to own up to what he had done some 14 years ago. He acknowledged that he remembered me from the foundation but he kind of looked uncomfortable and he said nothing as he was whisked away for his speech by his handlers," she said.

Three other women have reportedly accused Cain of inappropriate behavior while he was running the National Restaurant Association, but none of them has made public charges against him.

Allred last year represented Nicky Diaz Santillan, the housekeeper California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman fired because of her immigration status. She also represented one of the women who had an affair with golf legend Tiger Woods.

The latest accusations are likely to put more pressure on Cain to explain what happened with the women who worked for him at the restaurant group. Cain has denied any harassment occurred.

Before the press conference had concluded, Cain's campaign issued a statement calling the allegations "false."

"Activist celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred is bringing forth more false accusations against the character of Republican front-runner Herman Cain," the campaign said in a prepared statement.

"All allegations of harassment against Mr. Cain are completely false. Mr. Cain has never harassed anyone," the statement said.

Cain himself has sought to deflect questions on the matter, telling reporters on Saturday after a one-on-one debate in Texas with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich that "we are getting back on message, end of story."

"Far as we're concerned, these allegations aren't going anywhere," Cain said Sunday on Fox News, "I mean people might make up some more stuff. We are in it to win it."

Politico first reported on Oct. 30 at least two female employees complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain while he was head of the restaurant association in the 1990s. The Associated Press last week reported that a third woman had complained about Cain's behavior.

None of the other three has made the charges public and Sharon Bialek is the first woman to come before television cameras to make charges against the former chief executive of Godfather's pizza.

And Bialek said she did not want to make her case public, but only did so after hearing about the other women.

"Now I am coming forward to give a face, and a voice, to those women who cannot or for whatever reasons do not wish to come forward and on behalf of all women who are sexually harassed in the workplace but do not come out of fear of retaliation or of public humiliation," said Bialek, who worked for CBS radio station WCKG from 2006-7.

A poll released Sunday showed that Cain's poll numbers dropped for the first time since the accusations were made public a week ago, though it should be noted that the poll was conducted online. Online polls are typically much less reliable than traditional telephone polls.

The poll, conducted by Ipsos for Thomson Reuters, showed the former pizza chain restaurant executive's favorability rating among Republicans fell to 57 percent from 66 percent a week earlier.

Exhaustive media coverage of Cain's tenure as head of the restaurant association has boosted Cain's name recognition and helped him raise campaign cash from small donors.

His campaign said he raised $1.6 million in the first five days after the scandal broke.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57319854-503544/sharon-bialek-accuses-cain-of-sexually-inappropriate-behavior/?tag=strip
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 08:29 pm
@firefly,
I hear what you are saying, firefly. I guess, in fact I know, that I am getting old.
I find it bizarre that someone in Cain's position at the NRA with ambitions for something further would meet alone with a woman in a bar and then at a restaurant without a witness/chaperone.
I find it suspicious that the woman - seemingly a professional - would get herself into a situation of meeting a potential employer in a bar and then a restaurant.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 08:39 pm
@realjohnboy,
I don't find it suspicious because women can be fairly naive. I think women are more apt to take things at face value than men are.
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2011 08:43 pm
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:

I don't find it suspicious because women can be fairly naive. I think women are more apt to take things at face value than men are.


Johnboy takes cover under his desk .
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/15/2025 at 01:29:39