Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by InTheLight, Sep 14, 2015.
Picture is worth one thousand words...
There's a reason for Walker's decline in the polls
"...Is it a matter of being too conservative, or not conservative enough? I don’t think so. The problem is that Walker —- and there is no other way to put this —- comes across as a charlatan. He has changed positions so often that one gets dizzy keeping up with all his contortions.
The Wall Street Journal recently chronicled some of Walker’s flip flops. http://www.wsj.com/articles/scott-walkers-immigration-shift-is-his-latest-tack-to-right-1440111745 Over the years, they have included Walker switching his positions on state smoking laws, capital punishment, the death penalty, abortion, gay marriage and, now, immigration. Trying to tack as far right as he can on immigration, Walker seems receptive to changing the 14th amendment to take away birthright citizenship.
Also, Walker tends to rewrite history to fit his narrative. He takes credit for passing “right to work” legislation when it was the legislature that brought him along. Ditto on repeal of the prevailing wage requirement for local governments...."
I keep expecting it to catch up with Trump, but hasn't happened yet:
Donald Trump flip flops
Good gosh. Might be time to call it a day. He reminds me of Fred Thompson and how he was so well ballyhooed but completely fizzled.
He lacks charisma. I expect his handlers have told him to make a splash at the debate Wednesday night. Maybe attack Trump or Jeb.
The changing of positions over the years has no effect on polling. Walker is just boring and Trump is seen as completely divorced from D.C. He is talking about a real hot button issue which is illegal criminal immigration. People are willing to overlook all the crazy because of it.
Trump even holds 25% of the black vote according to the latest polling.
The Wall Street Journal nowadays represents the GOP establishment thinking. They do not like conservatives.
Didn't someone coach Walker before he announced his candidacy?
Nothing like a source with a single agenda.:thumbs:
Did you notice all the connections with Koch brothers on the site? That's why I provided the link, it seems that's what his foes are watching. I ran across the site with this search:
Koch Brothers and Scott Walker
EWF probably made a valid point.
Same agenda...and nothing else. Nothing like a biased source.
Do you have a list of unbiased sources? I'd like to see it.
Ahhh haaa haaa haaa :laugh:
All sources are biased. Usually on a given set of principles. We all see the world through the lens of principles we hold dear. These principles often clash when people work to move a society in a unified direction. Once this clash occurs then often people work to get the best of the other in order to make their goals dominant.
However, even given the core bias it is still possible to present the other side reasonably and in truth. Instead what we have is all out attempts to pain the other side in the worst possible light in order to win sympathy for our goals. This is where bias becomes dishonesty and the entire process falls apart.
Is that a no? Reads like a no.
Walker has always come off as smarmy to me. Mentioned it to folks and they thought I was nuts - after reading the article, maybe I'm not all that nutty after all.
Not condemning your view of him but that is the last thing I would see him as. However there are a number of politicans I think fit the bill:
Sheila Jackson Lee
and a whole host of others.