Scott Walker WI governor vs the Packers & teachers (2 Viewers)

[Mr.Pack]

Actually, you did a pretty poor job of splicing out one sentence in a long article.

Walker actually explained his answer a little bit more. Maybe not to your liking nor to a reader's liking (anti-Obama) but he did say a little more than, "I don't know." The media and anti-Obama crowd will run with this and splice it up just as much and shout, "USA", but Walker did explain why he doesn't know.

Good try, but that was his exact answer to the question if Obama was a Christian. One can only imagine the outrage on the right if he said the same thing about John Boehner, "I don't know" if he is a Christian". No one has ever questioned the faith of prominent political figures on the right, but with Obama this issue has been constantly raised and Walker played into that narrative. This was the proverbial dog whistle.

Keep fighting the good fiight.

 

[Mr.Pack]

Is the earth round? I don't know.

Terrible analogy.

Minnesota hasn't been real good for you, eh?

 

[squistion]

evale72 ‏@evale72 · 2h2 hours ago

Holy. ####. RT @costareports: Walker: "I dont know" if President Obama is a Christian http://wapo.st/1waXaf1

Walker is right. The people care about the real issues.

He is casting doubt on Obama's faith, following on the heels of Guiliani's claim the Obama "Does not love America". And, contrary to what you think, religion is a real issue to many people in this country. Hard to believe he would give the same answer if asked if George W. Bush is a Christian.

No, if you had actually read the article, he stated that he didn't know what Obama's faith was as he hasn't sat down to talk to him about it. Why should he speculate on what his faith is? Focus on the real issues, not the ones that the media clowns glam onto.

I did read the article, and once again, if he was asked if John Boehner was a Christian, the answer would never be that he didn't know with the follow up remark that they hadn't talked about it - the simple reason being it would be questioning Boehner's faith, which one assumes is Christian. Saying he doesn't know about Obama plays into the right wing narrative that he is a Muslim (or not one of the Christian faith).

 

[Mr.Pack]

evale72 ‏@evale72 · 2h2 hours ago

Holy. ####. RT @costareports: Walker: "I dont know" if President Obama is a Christian http://wapo.st/1waXaf1

Walker is right. The people care about the real issues.

He is casting doubt on Obama's faith, following on the heels of Guiliani's claim the Obama "Does not love America". And, contrary to what you think, religion is a real issue to many people in this country. Hard to believe he would give the same answer if asked if George W. Bush is a Christian.

No, if you had actually read the article, he stated that he didn't know what Obama's faith was as he hasn't sat down to talk to him about it. Why should he speculate on what his faith is? Focus on the real issues, not the ones that the media clowns glam onto.

I did read the article, and once again, if he was asked if John Boehner was a Christian, the answer would never be that he didn't know with the follow up remark that they hadn't talked about it - the simple reason being it would be questioning Boehner's faith, which one assumes is Christian. Saying he doesn't know about Obama plays into the right wing narrative that he is a Muslim (or not one of the Christian faith).

 

[Drunken Poster]

Is the earth round? I don't know.

#######it I'm out of likes already. Can this be fixed?

 

[Mr. Retukes]

Is Scott Walker a communist sympathizer? I don't know...

 

[joffer]

Is the earth round? I don't know.

IM NOT A SCIENTIST!!!!STOP,AMBUSHING ME!!!

 

[jon_mx]

Is the earth round? I don't know.

IM NOT A SCIENTIST!!!!STOP,AMBUSHING ME!!!

And then he followed it up with "it is a bit oval shaped having slightly more diameter in the equator than between the poles" but the haters ignored his explainarion missing his point completely.

 

[HellToupee]

Actually, you did a pretty poor job of splicing out one sentence in a long article.

Walker actually explained his answer a little bit more. Maybe not to your liking nor to a reader's liking (anti-Obama) but he did say a little more than, "I don't know." The media and anti-Obama crowd will run with this and splice it up just as much and shout, "USA", but Walker did explain why he doesn't know.

Good try, but that was his exact answer to the question if Obama was a Christian. One can only imagine the outrage on the right if he said the same thing about John Boehner, "I don't know" if he is a Christian". No one has ever questioned the faith of prominent political figures on the right, but with Obama this issue has been constantly raised and Walker played into that narrative. This was the proverbial dog whistle.

Keep fighting the good fiight.

just like rubes walking down the midway.

 

[HellToupee]

evale72 ‏@evale72 · 2h2 hours ago

Holy. ####. RT @costareports: Walker: "I dont know" if President Obama is a Christian http://wapo.st/1waXaf1

Walker is right. The people care about the real issues.

He is casting doubt on Obama's faith, following on the heels of Guiliani's claim the Obama "Does not love America". And, contrary to what you think, religion is a real issue to many people in this country. Hard to believe he would give the same answer if asked if George W. Bush is a Christian.

No, if you had actually read the article, he stated that he didn't know what Obama's faith was as he hasn't sat down to talk to him about it. Why should he speculate on what his faith is? Focus on the real issues, not the ones that the media clowns glam onto.

I did read the article, and once again, if he was asked if John Boehner was a Christian, the answer would never be that he didn't know with the follow up remark that they hadn't talked about it - the simple reason being it would be questioning Boehner's faith, which one assumes is Christian. Saying he doesn't know about Obama plays into the right wing narrative that he is a Muslim (or not one of the Christian faith).

can you post a few tweets about this?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It's interesting that Walker merits all this discussion like he was a front runner or near being one.

Saw a poll that had him in first place in Iowa 24%, up over Jeb and others who were at 10%.

 

[ArbyMelt]

I did read the article, and once again, if he was asked if John Boehner was a Christian, the answer would never be that he didn't know with the follow up remark that they hadn't talked about it - the simple reason being it would be questioning Boehner's faith, which one assumes is Christian. Saying he doesn't know about Obama plays into the right wing narrative that he is a Muslim (or not one of the Christian faith).

He wasn't asked about Boehner. Have you given thought about the motivation of Washington Post for asking that question to him?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Actually, you did a pretty poor job of splicing out one sentence in a long article.

Walker actually explained his answer a little bit more. Maybe not to your liking nor to a reader's liking (anti-Obama) but he did say a little more than, "I don't know." The media and anti-Obama crowd will run with this and splice it up just as much and shout, "USA", but Walker did explain why he doesn't know.

“I don’t know,” Walker said in an interview at the JW Marriott hotel in Washington, where he was attending the winter meeting of the National Governors Association.

Told that Obama has frequently spoken publicly about his Christian faith, Walker maintained that he was not aware of the president’s religion.

“I’ve actually never talked about it or I haven’t read about that,” Walker said, his voice calm and firm. “I’ve never asked him that,” he added. “You’ve asked me to make statements about people that I haven’t had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?”

Walker said such questions from reporters are reflective of a broader problem in the nation’s political-media culture, which he described as fixated on issues that are not relevant to most Americans.

“To me, this is a classic example of why people hate Washington and, increasingly, they dislike the press,” he said. “The things they care about don’t even remotely come close to what you’re asking about.”

I'm just going to say it's ambiguous. If Walker is implying he's not taking a position on evolution/creationism or other politicians' religious bona fides because he thinks the GOP needs to stop swinging religion around like a dead cat and focus on policy, then that's a good thing. If he's doing just that, then man that's disappointing.

 

[joffer]

"What's 4 x 6 + 8?"

"Depends....why are you asking?"

 

[squistion]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

 

[snogger]

 

[jonessed]

Some terrible fishing in here.

 

[hammerva]

Someone needs to explain to me how questioning the religion and patriotism of Obama is going to help the Republicans in 2016. I mean I assume they know he isn't running in 2016. Unless they have some magically way of saying "Obama hates America therefore all Democrats hate America" it isn't helping

I realize we are a stupid country in terms of politics but who is voting for a guy based on this. chances are the people who support this belief would have voted for him no matter what he says. we already know that the core conservative aren't enough to win the president

 

[Widbil83]

I was just thinking how funny it would be if he had to deal with a recall election at the same time as a presidential bid....................

You think there'd be an attempt at another recall election? The money spent for the first one was dumb enough and you think the Dems are going to put more money down?How dumb are you?

Are you kidding? Say he got enough duck dynastiers to get him through the primary, its him vs Clinton,, all they have to do is get a % of signatures, they wouldn't even need to run a candidate per se.

I'm afraid to ask but what the hell are you talking about?

A recall election,, you gotta lay off the weed my friend.

This is great right here.

 

[Widbil83]

I did read the article, and once again, if he was asked if John Boehner was a Christian, the answer would never be that he didn't know with the follow up remark that they hadn't talked about it - the simple reason being it would be questioning Boehner's faith, which one assumes is Christian. Saying he doesn't know about Obama plays into the right wing narrative that he is a Muslim (or not one of the Christian faith).

He wasn't asked about Boehner. Have you given thought about the motivation of Washington Post for asking that question to him?

To get people like him to fake outrage and post tweets about it all over the Internet. "OMG Walker didn't care enough to answer a question the media pulled out of thin air!!!!"

 

[Mr. Retukes]

Someone needs to explain to me how questioning the religion and patriotism of Obama is going to help the Republicans in 2016. I mean I assume they know he isn't running in 2016. Unless they have some magically way of saying "Obama hates America therefore all Democrats hate America" it isn't helping

This strategy seemed to work well enough for George W. Bush in 2000.

 

[MaxThreshold]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

Meh. Who cares? I just can't work up enough outrage like you to be bothered by his answer because I don't really give two ####s about it.

 

[squistion]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

Meh. Who cares? I just can't work up enough outrage like you to be bothered by his answer because I don't really give two ####s about it.

I am not outraged. I am surprised more than anything else that Walker would make a statement that I would expect from someone like Giuliani. Just pointing out this pathetic pandering to the type of people who turn out in Republican primaries.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

Meh. Who cares? I just can't work up enough outrage like you to be bothered by his answer because I don't really give two ####s about it.

Methinks you doth downplay too much.

 

[MaxThreshold]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

Meh. Who cares? I just can't work up enough outrage like you to be bothered by his answer because I don't really give two ####s about it.

I am not outraged. I am surprised more than anything else that Walker would make a statement that I would expect from someone like Giuliani. Just pointing out this pathetic pandering to the type of people who turn out in Republican primaries.

Name me a politician who doesn't pander to the type of people that turn out for their primaries and I'll show you a liar.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

Meh. Who cares? I just can't work up enough outrage like you to be bothered by his answer because I don't really give two ####s about it.

I am not outraged. I am surprised more than anything else that Walker would make a statement that I would expect from someone like Giuliani. Just pointing out this pathetic pandering to the type of people who turn out in Republican primaries.

Name me a politician who doesn't pander to the type of people that turn out for their primaries and I'll show you a liar.

If the Republican primary electorate contains enough people who doubt Obama's Christianity to warrant pandering to those folks, that's quite an indictment of the GOP.

On the other hand, though, I've seen quite a few Obama supporters on this board say openly that they too think that he's secretly an atheist. That's pretty ugly either way, but if the guy's supporters can traffic in this kind of stuff, I have a hard time getting worked up over his opponents picking it up and running with it.

 

[squistion]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

Meh. Who cares? I just can't work up enough outrage like you to be bothered by his answer because I don't really give two ####s about it.

I am not outraged. I am surprised more than anything else that Walker would make a statement that I would expect from someone like Giuliani. Just pointing out this pathetic pandering to the type of people who turn out in Republican primaries.

Name me a politician who doesn't pander to the type of people that turn out for their primaries and I'll show you a liar.

And that formula worked so well for Mitt Romney, didn't it?

 

[RCon]

Actually, it did. Mitt won the GOP primary, if I remember correctly.

Every politician panders. Getting upset over it shows a lack of understanding regarding how politics work.

 

[squistion]

Actually, it did. Mitt won the GOP primary, if I remember correctly.

Every politician panders. Getting upset over it shows a lack of understanding regarding how politics work.

Yes, it did well for President Romney. Problem is he tracked so far right in the primaries, it cost him among moderates, independents, women and minorities in the general election.

 

[RCon]

Actually, it did. Mitt won the GOP primary, if I remember correctly.

Every politician panders. Getting upset over it shows a lack of understanding regarding how politics work.

Yes, it did well for President Romney. Problem is he tracked so far right in the primaries, it cost him among moderates, independents, women and minorities in the general election.

Oh please. None of the GOP candidates were going to beat Obama regardless. It had nothing to do with "tracking so far right in the primaries".

 

[squistion]

Actually, it did. Mitt won the GOP primary, if I remember correctly.

Every politician panders. Getting upset over it shows a lack of understanding regarding how politics work.

Yes, it did well for President Romney. Problem is he tracked so far right in the primaries, it cost him among moderates, independents, women and minorities in the general election.

Oh please. None of the GOP candidates were going to beat Obama regardless. It had nothing to do with "tracking so far right in the primaries".

That is either revisionist history or you took a vacation from this board in 2011/2012. Republicans/conservatives were sure up until election day that Obama was going to lose. And Romney made it a close race. If he had been the same moderate Republican as when he was Governor of Massachusetts, that might have changed the outcome of the election.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

From conservative commentator/blogger Matt Lewis:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/21/scott-walker-s-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-answer.html?via=mobile&source=twitter

Scott Walkers Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Answer

Does it matter if Obama is a Christian or not? No, but it matters how Republicans answer stupid questions like that.

[...] On Saturday, Dan Balz and Robert Costa of the Washington Post asked Walker if President Obama was a Christian. Now, I have no idea why this question was relevant, but thats not the point. Good candidates know how to effectively answer or parry stupid or irrelevant inquiries. Instead, Walker made this a story with this answer: "I dont know," he told the Post. "Ive actually never talked about it or I havent read about that ... Ive never asked him that. Youve asked me to make statements about people that I havent had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?"

In case you were wondering, the correct answer was not "I dont know." The correct answer would have been, "Yes the president is a Christian. His policies are bad." (Question: Why is it so damned difficult for someone to say that Obama is a Christian who loves Americaand he also happens to have been a really bad president? Why not grant him this small concession? Hes never going to be on the ballot again, so why are Republicans still fighting the last war?)

A slightly less perfect answer (but still acceptable) might have been, "This is silly. Why are you asking me about someone elses religion when weve got a huge national debt, Iran going nuclear, and ISIS running rampant in the Middle East?" He gave just about the worst possible answer one could imagine.

As you might expect, some conservatives on Twitter are rallying to his defense. Theyd rather stick it to the media than find a way to overcome them. They believe that Walkers answer somehow heroically demonstrated the absurdity of the media. They seem more interested in a candidate who wants to win the argument than one who wants to win the election. And they are less concerned about Walkers inability to appropriately handle the question than they were by the fact that the question had been asked in the first place. In their minds, Walker is some sort of folk hero for providing that inept answer. But I can assure you, thats not how the majority of Americans (who arent conservative activists on Twitter) will see it.

Meh. Who cares? I just can't work up enough outrage like you to be bothered by his answer because I don't really give two ####s about it.

I am not outraged. I am surprised more than anything else that Walker would make a statement that I would expect from someone like Giuliani. Just pointing out this pathetic pandering to the type of people who turn out in Republican primaries.

Name me a politician who doesn't pander to the type of people that turn out for their primaries and I'll show you a liar.

If the Republican primary electorate contains enough people who doubt Obama's Christianity to warrant pandering to those folks, that's quite an indictment of the GOP.

On the other hand, though, I've seen quite a few Obama supporters on this board say openly that they too think that he's secretly an atheist. That's pretty ugly either way, but if the guy's supporters can traffic in this kind of stuff, I have a hard time getting worked up over his opponents picking it up and running with it.

That's a good point. Also, Lincoln didn't think too highly of black people, which totally justifies secession.

 

[RCon]

That is either revisionist history or you took a vacation from this board in 2011/2012. Republicans/conservatives were sure up until election day that Obama was going to lose. And Romney made it a close race. If he had been the same moderate Republican as when he was Governor of Massachusetts, that might have changed the outcome of the election.

Whether GOP diehards irrationally believed he had a chance or not is irrelevant to whether he actually had a chance. He didn't, and I posted as much at the time (i.e. before the election).

 

[squistion]

That is either revisionist history or you took a vacation from this board in 2011/2012. Republicans/conservatives were sure up until election day that Obama was going to lose. And Romney made it a close race. If he had been the same moderate Republican as when he was Governor of Massachusetts, that might have changed the outcome of the election.

Whether GOP diehards irrationally believed he had a chance or not is irrelevant to whether he actually had a chance. He didn't, and I posted as much at the time (i.e. before the election).

If you felt that way you should have put down some bets along with Tim, but I digress.

Anyway, shortly before the 2012 election The National Journal figured it the same as I:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/columns/political-connections/mitt-romney-s-original-sin-20120920

But if Romney loses in November, the primary cause wont be the tactical missteps and backbiting that Politico chronicled, or even the past two weeks rapid-fire controversies. The much larger problem will be fundamental strategic choices the candidate made during the Republican primary, including several that placed him in conflict with long-term demographic trends reshaping the electorate.

Romneys biggest general-election problem is that he did not believe he could beat a GOP primary field with no competitor more formidable than Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, or Newt Gingrich without tacking sharply right on key issues. Romney repeatedly took policy positions that minimized his risks during the spring but have multiplied his challenges in the fall. His fate isnt sealed, but the choices he made in the primaries have left him with a path to victory so narrow that it might daunt Indiana Jones. "To secure the nomination, they made decisions about immigration, tax cuts, and a whole host of other issues that had no strategic vision," said John Weaver, a senior strategist for John McCains 2008 campaign. "So hes now trapped demographically and doesnt even seem to understand it."

 

[Mario Kart]

I hope he is just pandering with this terrorist/protestor thing because that has to be the dumbest thing I have seen in this "presidential" run so far. Who is going to buy this?

Sure, the crazies.

He is hurting the state of Wisconsin more and more by pandering to the crazies around the country. In my opinion, he is not doing himself any favors or winning any needed votes.

 

[sho nuff]

I hope he is just pandering with this terrorist/protestor thing because that has to be the dumbest thing I have seen in this "presidential" run so far. Who is going to buy this?

Sure, the crazies.

He is hurting the state of Wisconsin more and more by pandering to the crazies around the country. In my opinion, he is not doing himself any favors or winning any needed votes.

Yeah...an idiotic statement by a guy who was already going to be ripped apart on lack of foreign policy experience...now saying that taking on ISIS is like taking on protestors. Especially considering the manner in which he "took on" those protestors.

Ooof.

 

[snogger]

I hope he is just pandering with this terrorist/protestor thing because that has to be the dumbest thing I have seen in this "presidential" run so far. Who is going to buy this?

Sure, the crazies.

He is hurting the state of Wisconsin more and more by pandering to the crazies around the country. In my opinion, he is not doing himself any favors or winning any needed votes.

I'm guessing you are talking about the "I fought the Unions and won and I will beat ISIS"

If so.. Yea X Infinity.

As for "Hurting Wisconsin".

X Infinity -1

 

[Mr. Pickles]

I wonder if he can see Mosul from his house.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

In light of Walker's recent reply of "I don't know" when asked if he knew what religion Obama was (or something, however you want to read that, he may have been saying that hey maybe we should get religion out of politics..... or not)....

...the Washington Post took a poll asking what religion Obama is:

Which of these do you think most likely describes what Obama believes deep down? Muslim, Christian, atheist, spiritual, or I don’t know.

"I don't know":

GOP - 29%

Indies - 47%

Demos - 26%

"Christian":

GOP - 9%

Indies - 16%

Demos - 45%

"Muslim":

GOP - 54%

Indies - 26%

Demos - 10%

"Aetheist":

GOP - 5%

Indies - 2%

Demos - 2%

"Spritual":

GOP - 3%

Indies - 9%

Demos - 17%

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/02/25/scott-walkers-view-of-obamas-religion-makes-him-a-moderate/?postshare=1651424880388887

Now 54% muslim is a really high number for the GOP...

...but the I Don't Know camp for the Demos is just as high, and 45% "Christian" by Democrats is not exactly a big number either.

 

[MaxThreshold]

I hope he is just pandering with this terrorist/protestor thing because that has to be the dumbest thing I have seen in this "presidential" run so far. Who is going to buy this?

Sure, the crazies.

He is hurting the state of Wisconsin more and more by pandering to the crazies around the country. In my opinion, he is not doing himself any favors or winning any needed votes.

Yeah...an idiotic statement by a guy who was already going to be ripped apart on lack of foreign policy experience...now saying that taking on ISIS is like taking on protestors. Especially considering the manner in which he "took on" those protestors.

Ooof.

I don't know. Did you see those lefty nut job protesters at all?

 

[RCon]

Meh, poll numbers just don't resonate with me any more. I get these calls all the time, and my only two responses are to either A) tell them never to call me again, or B) intentionally give stupid answers. I imagine most of the country uses response A. Doesn't that pretty much make these polls meaningless?

 

[squistion]

Meh, poll numbers just don't resonate with me any more. I get these calls all the time, and my only two responses are to either A) tell them never to call me again, or B) intentionally give stupid answers. I imagine most of the country uses response A. Doesn't that pretty much make these polls meaningless?

For what it is worth: "Respondents were interviewed on-line."

Does that make the responses more valid than phone calls? I would think so, but I don't have any numbers offhand to back this up.

 

[RCon]

Whether online, by mail, or by phone, the problem with such polls is that the participants are self-selecting, in the sense that most probably decline to be polled.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

For what it is worth: "Respondents were interviewed on-line."

Does that make the responses more valid than phone calls? I would think so, but I don't have any numbers offhand to back this up.

Whether online, by mail, or by phone, the problem with such polls is that the participants are self-selecting, in the sense that most probably decline to be polled.

This is linked in WaPo and it's from 2010:

The view that Obama is a Muslim is more widespread among his political opponents than among his backers. Roughly a third of conservative Republicans (34%) say Obama is a Muslim, as do 30% of those who disapprove of Obama’s job performance. But even among many of his supporters and allies, less than half now say Obama is a Christian. Among Democrats, for instance, 46% say Obama is a Christian, down from 55% in March 2009.​

The belief that Obama is a Muslim has increased most sharply among Republicans (up 14 points since 2009), especially conservative Republicans (up 16 points). But the number of independents who say Obama is a Muslim has also increased significantly (up eight points). There has been little change in the number of Democrats who say Obama is a Muslim, but fewer Democrats today say he is a Christian (down nine points since 2009).​

​

http://www.pewforum.org/2010/08/18/growing-number-of-americans-say-obama-is-a-muslim/​

 

[sho nuff]

I hope he is just pandering with this terrorist/protestor thing because that has to be the dumbest thing I have seen in this "presidential" run so far. Who is going to buy this?

Sure, the crazies.

He is hurting the state of Wisconsin more and more by pandering to the crazies around the country. In my opinion, he is not doing himself any favors or winning any needed votes.

Yeah...an idiotic statement by a guy who was already going to be ripped apart on lack of foreign policy experience...now saying that taking on ISIS is like taking on protestors. Especially considering the manner in which he "took on" those protestors.

Ooof.

I don't know. Did you see those lefty nut job protesters at all?

Sure...just how did he "take them on"?

Sneaking into buildings...backdoor tactics to get his stuff through.

Look, I support what he did, but how he got it through was weasely and not some brave action of taking on protesters.

 

[RCon]

Same problem. Smart people hang up the phone, IMO.

 

[squistion]

That far left site, National Review, had this to say about Walker equating union protesters with ISIS:

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/414512/scott-walkers-awful-answer-isis-jim-geraghty

Scott Walkers Awful Answer on ISIS

Wisconsin governor Scott Walker received a lot of completely undeserved grief from the national news media in the past weeks. But he may have made a genuine unforced error in one of his remarks today.

Asked about ISIS, Walker responded, "If I can take on 100,000 protesters, I can do the same across the globe."

That is a terrible response. First, taking on a bunch of protesters is not comparably difficult to taking on a Caliphate with sympathizers and terrorists around the globe, and saying so suggests Walker doesnt quite understand the complexity of the challenge from ISIS and its allied groups.

Second, it is insulting to the protesters, a group I take no pleasure in defending. The protesters in Wisconsin, so furiously angry over Walkers reforms and disruptive to the procedures of passing laws, earned plenty of legitimate criticism. But theyre not ISIS. Theyre not beheading innocent people. Theyre Americans, and as much as we may find their ideas, worldview, and perspective spectacularly wrongheaded, they dont deserve to be compared to murderous terrorists.

UPDATE: Kristen Kukowski, communications director for Walkers 527 organization, sends along this statement: Governor Walker believes our fight against ISIS is one of the most important issues our country faces. He was in no way comparing any American citizen to ISIS. What the governor was saying was when faced with adversity he chooses strength and leadership. Those are the qualities we need to fix the leadership void this White House has created.

 

[The Kerminator]

That far left site, National Review, had this to say about Walker equating union protesters with ISIS:

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/414512/scott-walkers-awful-answer-isis-jim-geraghty

Scott Walkers Awful Answer on ISIS

Wisconsin governor Scott Walker received a lot of completely undeserved grief from the national news media in the past weeks. But he may have made a genuine unforced error in one of his remarks today.

Asked about ISIS, Walker responded, "If I can take on 100,000 protesters, I can do the same across the globe."

That is a terrible response. First, taking on a bunch of protesters is not comparably difficult to taking on a Caliphate with sympathizers and terrorists around the globe, and saying so suggests Walker doesnt quite understand the complexity of the challenge from ISIS and its allied groups.

Second, it is insulting to the protesters, a group I take no pleasure in defending. The protesters in Wisconsin, so furiously angry over Walkers reforms and disruptive to the procedures of passing laws, earned plenty of legitimate criticism. But theyre not ISIS. Theyre not beheading innocent people. Theyre Americans, and as much as we may find their ideas, worldview, and perspective spectacularly wrongheaded, they dont deserve to be compared to murderous terrorists.

UPDATE: Kristen Kukowski, communications director for Walkers 527 organization, sends along this statement: Governor Walker believes our fight against ISIS is one of the most important issues our country faces. He was in no way comparing any American citizen to ISIS. What the governor was saying was when faced with adversity he chooses strength and leadership. Those are the qualities we need to fix the leadership void this White House has created.

First, I think it was a stupid statement by Walker to make. But I do believe what his communications director said is the message he was trying to convey. But it was stupid of him to compare his willingness to face adversity head on with ISIS.

Second, the fact that he doesn't understand the complexity of dealing with ISIS doesn't really differ from our current president.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Meh, poll numbers just don't resonate with me any more. I get these calls all the time, and my only two responses are to either A) tell them never to call me again, or B) intentionally give stupid answers. I imagine most of the country uses response A. Doesn't that pretty much make these polls meaningless?

LOL. Is this real math, or math you use to make you feel better about yourself as a Republican?

 

[tommyGunZ]

In light of Walker's recent reply of "I don't know" when asked if he knew what religion Obama was (or something, however you want to read that, he may have been saying that hey maybe we should get religion out of politics..... or not)....

...the Washington Post took a poll asking what religion Obama is:

Which of these do you think most likely describes what Obama believes deep down? Muslim, Christian, atheist, spiritual, or I don’t know.

"I don't know":

GOP - 29%

Indies - 47%

Demos - 26%

"Christian":

GOP - 9%

Indies - 16%

Demos - 45%

"Muslim":

GOP - 54%

Indies - 26%

Demos - 10%

"Aetheist":

GOP - 5%

Indies - 2%

Demos - 2%

"Spritual":

GOP - 3%

Indies - 9%

Demos - 17%

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/02/25/scott-walkers-view-of-obamas-religion-makes-him-a-moderate/?postshare=1651424880388887

Now 54% muslim is a really high number for the GOP...

...but the I Don't Know camp for the Demos is just as high, and 45% "Christian" by Democrats is not exactly a big number either.

Walker should know better than the general public. You and I both know that Walker knows Obama is a Christian, and that his "I don't know" answer was pandering to the stupid people in his party. Why Re you trying to defend this nonsense?