New York Times endorses John Kasich

New York Times endorses John Kasich (1342938)	Home · Maps · About

Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2]

Page 1 of 2

Next Page >

(1342938)	view threaded
New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:07:42 2016 fiogf49gjkf0d On the Dem side, they went for Hillary. CBS New York These candidates just got endorsed by the New York Times By Reena Flores January 30, 2016, 12:58 PM In a Saturday editorial, the New York Times threw their weight behind Republican presidential candidate and Ohio Gov. John Kasich — but you might never know it if you had only skimmed its first paragraphs. That's because the newspaper of record devoted its opening lines to lambasting the rest of the Republican field, with front-runners Donald Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz featuring prominently in the attacks. Kasich's name, in contrast, first appears in the sixth paragraph of the editorial. "The battle to be the Republican choice for president has been nasty, brutish and anything but short," the Times began, before going on to blast Trump and Cruz as "equally objectionable for different reasons." "Mr. Trump has neither experience in nor interest in learning about national security, defense or global trade," the editorial board penned. "From deporting Mexican immigrants and barring Muslims to slapping a 45 percent tariff on Chinese imports, Mr. Trump invents his positions as he goes along." Of Cruz, the Times labeled his campaign one of "ambition," rather than "constitutional principles." "Whether he's threatening to 'carpet bomb' Syrian villages or pitching a phony 'flat tax' that would batter middle-class consumers, Mr. Cruz will say anything to win," the editorial said. "The greater worry is that he'd follow words with action." The Kasich endorsement went on to slap at the wrists of other GOP candidates trailing behind in the polls: Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has "failed to ignite much support"; Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has "forgotten his more positive 'New American Century' campaign" in favor of "embracing the alarmist views" of his opponents; and Ben Carson has shown a remarkable "inability to grasp the world." The Times didn't even name Kasich in the editorial's headline, instead titling it an anodyne "Chance to Reset the Republican Race." The Times spent just a scant few paragraphs enumerating the White House qualifications of the Ohio governor, who the paper acknowledged was a "distinct underdog." The Times named Kasich a chief executive with conservative bona fides — a man who has "gone after public-sector unions" and limited abortion and same-sex marriage rights, but is also given to compromise in the face of partisan fights. The paper praised Kasich's position on a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigration, as well as his $13 billion expansion of Medicaid in Ohio. "For Republicans tired of the extremism and inexperience on display in this race," the editorial board wrote, Kasich was "the only plausible choice." During a Fox News interview Saturday, Kasich called the Times nod "fantastic." "It's just really awesome," he said. "You want to have everybody for you. I think that what works for me is I've proven that I can attract voters across the board." In the GOP primary season, however, the Times endorsement may be a mixed blessing for Kasich, entrenching him further as an "establishment" candidate when Republican voters are trending towards contenders that are anything but. In the latest CBS News Battleground Tracker poll released earlier this week, Trump leads among voters in Iowa — where the nation's first nominating contest will be held in just two days — because of his ability to "shake up the system." In a separate editorial, the Times also gave their endorsement to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: the "right choice for the Democrats to present a vision for America that is radically different from the one that leading Republican candidates offer." The paper focused largely on Clinton's foreign policy experience and specifically applauded her economic platform. "Her lifelong fight for women bolsters her credibility in this area, since so many of the problems with labor law hit women the hardest, including those involving child care, paid sick leave, unstable schedules and low wages for tipped workers," the Times wrote. The editorial board questioned her "hawkish" stance on the use of military might in conflicts abroad, but still put their faith in Clinton to "use American military power effectively." The endorsement also drew differences between Clinton and her rival Bernie Sanders on gun control, naming the former secretary a "strong advocate of sensible and effective measures to combat the plague of firearms." Sanders' record, meanwhile, was "relatively weak," according to the Times. Sanders was also slammed for for lacking the "breadth of experience or policy ideas" compared to Clinton. Of the Vermont senator's boldest proposals to tackle the financial sector and to reinvent the health care system with a single-payer alternative, the editorial board said "his plans for achieving them aren't realistic." The newspaper backed Clinton in the 2008 presidential election and endorsed her twice during her two New York races for the U.S. Senate.
Post a New Response

(1342942)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SLRT* on Sat Jan 30 14:18:29 2016, in response to New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:07:42 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Deja vu all over again. Eight years ago The Times endorsed John McCain as the only acceptable Republican hopeful. Well, McCain became the GOP candidate and the Times turned totally against him in their quest to elect the Democrat.
Post a New Response

(1342943)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by mtk52983* on Sat Jan 30 14:20:41 2016, in response to New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:07:42 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Unfortunately, I think Kasich is too far behind at this point to win the nomination. That being said, if he is VP with Marco Rubio at the top of the ticket I think that gives the Republicans the best chance at winning the White House. There are plenty of voters that are disenchanted with Hillary Clinton (those on the left who voted for Obama because they thought they were getting an anti-establishment candidate and would rather sit home than vote for Hillary Clinton, these were the people who voted for Ralph Nader, and swing voters disenchated with the reaction of the Obama administration on foreign policy matter like Iran or domestically in response to Baltimore or Ferguson)
Post a New Response

(1342944)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by mtk52983* on Sat Jan 30 14:22:18 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by SLRT on Sat Jan 30 14:18:29 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d The New York Times will always support the Democrat even if the Democrat was Adolf Hitler (and not just Adolf Hitler if you use Glenn Beckian logic)
Post a New Response

(1342945)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Olog-hai* on Sat Jan 30 14:23:33 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by SLRT on Sat Jan 30 14:18:29 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Says it all.
Post a New Response

(1342946)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by LuchAAA* on Sat Jan 30 14:29:12 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by mtk52983 on Sat Jan 30 14:20:41 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d I agree. But the GOP will fuck up and nominate Cruz or Trump. Funny thing is every douchebag is talking about Rush Limabaugh as being an influence. In 2008 he endorsed Romney in the primaries. In 2012 he endorsed Santorum. So it shows you he has no influence in the GOP primaries. His candidate never wins.
Post a New Response

(1342948)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by AlM* on Sat Jan 30 14:35:00 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by mtk52983 on Sat Jan 30 14:22:18 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Your statement is not even metaphorically correct.
Post a New Response

(1342950)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by AlM* on Sat Jan 30 14:43:20 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 14:35:00 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d For example, Paturkey III
Post a New Response

(1342953)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Olog-hai* on Sat Jan 30 14:48:53 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Jan 30 14:29:12 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Stop kissing the liberals' asses.
Post a New Response

(1342957)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by LuchAAA* on Sat Jan 30 15:00:45 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:48:53 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d thanks for attacking. I won't be attending Mass tonight because it's cancelled due to some Pirate Parade in downtown Tampa that's just an excuse to abuse alcohol. Not sure why you're attacking me. Is it that I've exposed Irish-Catholicism? The GOP has a way of picking terrible candidates. But we live in an anti-white male society. When you think about it, the GOP did not even win the popular vote when Bush beat Gore. And things are only worse for us now.
Post a New Response

(1342961)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Catfish 44* on Sat Jan 30 15:10:25 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Jan 30 15:00:45 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d How do they cancel mass? I've never heard of such a thing.
Post a New Response

(1342966)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by LuchAAA* on Sat Jan 30 15:15:25 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Catfish 44 on Sat Jan 30 15:10:25 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d How do they cancel mass? I've never heard of such a thing. The church is along the parade route. They just cancel 5:30 p Mass once a year.
Post a New Response

(1342972)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by AlM* on Sat Jan 30 15:23:42 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Catfish 44 on Sat Jan 30 15:10:25 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d There are also parishes that only have one priest. If the priest is away and hasn't been able to get a replacement, mass is canceled. It's happened to me multiple times in the past year, including last week's snow, as well as a parish I was visiting in Montana where they had only a Eucharistic service because the priest was away.
Post a New Response

(1342985)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred* on Sat Jan 30 16:15:01 2016, in response to New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:07:42 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d I'm a Kasich supporter and a monthly contributor to his campaign. I think he is the best man for the job at President, a statesman and not some cheap ass politician. He can reach across the aisle, and he can bring Reagan Democrats, independents and African-Americans into his camp. He has a proven track record when he served in Congress, both as House Budget Chairman where we got a budget surplus two or three years in a row for the first time in over four decades....and he has turned a stagnant and recession stressed Ohio into one of the most well off states in the country, with surpluses and hundreds of thousands of new jobs. He is a winner and is a compassionate type of conservative that can attract young and well as elderly voters. Then, if you've followed his record, you already knew that.
Post a New Response

(1342998)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Sat Jan 30 17:02:34 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 14:35:00 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Although it was a long time ago, they didn't support Adlai Stevenson either time.
Post a New Response

(1343003)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by AlM* on Sat Jan 30 17:12:49 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 30 17:02:34 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d It seems they became committed Democrats with JFK (though they did support Javits to the end). They supported Wilkie and Dewey.
Post a New Response

(1343011)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by bingbong* on Sat Jan 30 17:27:39 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Sat Jan 30 16:15:01 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d He's a misogynst.
Post a New Response

(1343013)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SLRT* on Sat Jan 30 17:32:27 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 17:12:49 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Back in the day, many newspapers openly declared their editorial page perspective. The New York Herald Tribune was a Republican newspaper. The Times was a declared independent paper, and they seemed to take that seriously. In the news columns all papers were supposed to be independent, a quality that's steadily eroded from the 60s onward .
Post a New Response

(1343014)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SLRT* on Sat Jan 30 17:32:27 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 17:12:49 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Back in the day, many newspapers openly declared their editorial page perspective. The New York Herald Tribune was a Republican newspaper. The Times was a declared independent paper, and they seemed to take that seriously. In the news columns all papers were supposed to be independent, a quality that's steadily eroded from the 60s onward .
Post a New Response

(1343015)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SelkirkTMO* on Sat Jan 30 17:34:31 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by SLRT on Sat Jan 30 17:32:27 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d PRECISELY! And the editorials never colored the news. Further, news wouldn't get published without at least three agreeing verifications as to the facts, or if it was a signed public record.
Post a New Response

(1343020)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by mtk52983* on Sat Jan 30 17:38:58 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by bingbong on Sat Jan 30 17:27:39 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d As this is a serious allegation kindly post proof
Post a New Response

(1343027)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Olog-hai* on Sat Jan 30 18:07:00 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by SLRT on Sat Jan 30 17:32:27 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d The 60s? There was a liberal slant to the news in the 50s.
Post a New Response

(1343031)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Sat Jan 30 18:26:44 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 17:12:49 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Dewey 44, 48 or both?
Post a New Response

(1343046)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Joe V* on Sat Jan 30 19:16:36 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by SLRT on Sat Jan 30 14:18:29 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d The NYT endorses "establishment" candidates. So it won't be Trump, Cruz, and it won't be Bernie.
Post a New Response

(1343055)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by AlM* on Sat Jan 30 20:08:07 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by mtk52983 on Sat Jan 30 17:38:58 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Plenty of allegations here. Not going to investigate how solid they are.
Post a New Response

(1343056)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Sat Jan 30 20:10:10 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 20:08:07 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d That assumes that opposing Planned Parenthood is inherently misogynistic.
Post a New Response

(1343058)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by AlM* on Sat Jan 30 20:37:25 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 30 20:10:10 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Agreed. There could be non-misogynistic reasons for not wanting to provide funds to an organization that will overwhelmingly use those funds to provide medical care to poor women. However, one might also argue that when the result is so clear-cut, the burden of proof of a different intent shifts to the other side.
Post a New Response

(1343067)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by bingbong* on Sat Jan 30 22:21:01 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 30 20:10:10 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d It is.
Post a New Response

(1343068)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by bingbong* on Sat Jan 30 22:25:48 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 20:37:25 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Not to neglect that there is no other organization able to take up the patients from Planned Parenthood long or short term, being so many OB/GYNs won't take Medicaid patients owing to low rate of claim recovery v. liability expense for a practice in this field. So Planned Parenthood patients, disproportionately young and poor, will have no means to access medical care they need.
Post a New Response

(1343097)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by TonyG* on Sun Jan 31 00:27:53 2016, in response to New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:07:42 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d I like Kasich. He's the type of candidate I'd vote for if he ever made it to the ballot. Problem is, he'll never make it to the ballot.
Post a New Response

(1343100)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by R2Chinatown* on Sun Jan 31 00:35:48 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 20:08:07 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Plenty of allegations, one issue
Post a New Response

(1343106)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by mtk52983* on Sun Jan 31 02:51:09 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 30 20:37:25 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d 1) Notwithstanding what the self-appointed "expert" bingbong believes, there are sufficient OB/GYN's who accept Medicaid and cutting funding to Planned Parenthood could allow for greater reimbursement rates to private practitioners which would make more OB/GYN's willing to accept Medicaid 2) It is not misogynistic to believe that the Government should not fund Planned Parenthood at its current level at the expense of other organizations that also provide medical services to poor women including religious organizations that people would scream 1st Amendment if they got funding 3) Although no Government aid is to be used for advertising, lobbying, etc., Government aid allows the agency to use donations for that purpose as opposed to using donations for medical care like other organizations 4) Unlike hospitals and private practitioners, Planned Parenthood facilities are often ill-equipped to handle complications if they do arise. Planned Parenthood lacks the resources of outpatient surgical facilities and their doctors are unaffiliated with local hospitals which greatly reduces continuity of care
Post a New Response

(1343107)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by LuchAAA* on Sun Jan 31 03:18:01 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by mtk52983 on Sun Jan 31 02:51:09 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d It is not misogynistic If anything, it's misandry to have Planned Parenthood and not a comparable organization for men.
Post a New Response

(1343108)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by mtk52983* on Sun Jan 31 03:33:44 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Jan 31 03:18:01 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d To be fair, men don't need OB/GYN services unless Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwarzenegger are involved. I guess low income men could go to Planned Parenthood if they were concerned about possible breast cancer, but I have never tried that. Prostate issues are usually noticed based on symptoms and bloodwork done by the Primary Care Physician followed by the appropriate referrals. No need to have an organization like Planned Parenthood if every man had insurance to allow at least a yearly comprehensive physical examination.
Post a New Response

(1343109)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SelkirkTMO* on Sun Jan 31 03:34:47 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Jan 31 03:18:01 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d LOL! You republicans are so clueless! Planned Parenthood IS for men! Check out Arizona, they all provide the same everywhere. https://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-arizona/online-health-center/services-men Florida? No problem! https://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-center/florida/lakeland/33803/lakeland-health-center-2214-90300/mens-health Even Unca Dave can get his flagpole shined: https://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-center/texas/houston/77081/southwest-health-center-2293-91650/mens-health What a sad and clueless bunch you are. You'd rather pay for STD's at hospitals, pay off the baby daddy, and bring every child in a battered home to a life of crime and rejection? That's gonna cost a FUCKLOAD more than Planned Parenthood ...
Post a New Response

(1343110)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SelkirkTMO* on Sun Jan 31 03:36:30 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by mtk52983 on Sun Jan 31 03:33:44 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Sounds like some of you need to get off the rag ... it's unnatural. :)
Post a New Response

(1343111)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by LuchAAA* on Sun Jan 31 03:49:12 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jan 31 03:34:47 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d You do realize that Planned Parenthood was created by Irish-Catholics to prevent unwanted pregnancies? The Irish are very librul. Planned Parenthood is a woman's health clinic.
Post a New Response

(1343112)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SelkirkTMO* on Sun Jan 31 03:58:58 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Jan 31 03:49:12 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Go with whatever the morons tell you, it's not like that and hasn't been like that ever since I've been alive. Not everyone has insurance, even now. How much do you think all those unknown Herpes cases are going to cost? Or AIDS? Planned Parenthood is willing to do something about that. Medicaid, not so much.
Post a New Response

(1343113)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by LuchAAA* on Sun Jan 31 04:01:24 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jan 31 03:58:58 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d all I know is that Planned Parenthood should fight Fat Feminism. women are getting fatter and fatter.
Post a New Response

(1343117)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by SelkirkTMO* on Sun Jan 31 04:27:53 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Jan 31 04:01:24 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d So are men. :) Planned Parenthood is there to take care of everybody's genitals. What's above them is someone else's problem. Heh. In all seriousness though, it SCARES me how people are willing to be lead by their dick by the clueless and then wonder why their OWN taxes are shooting through the roof. Maybe we NEED Bernie ... just for the rude awakening. :(
Post a New Response

(1343128)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Sand Box John* on Sun Jan 31 09:07:19 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Jan 30 14:29:12 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d I can't let this one slide by without a rebuttal. I agree. But the GOP will fuck up and nominate Cruz or Trump. Funny thing is every douchebag is talking about Rush Limabaugh as being an influence. I the words of Rush Limabaugh, he "lives rent free" in the minds of many democrat politicians and members of the media. In 2008 he endorsed Romney in the primaries. In 2012 he endorsed Santorum. So it shows you he has no influence in the GOP primaries. His candidate never wins. He has not nor ever has endorsed a candidate seeking the Republican Party nomination for President of The United States. The only time he did anything close to an endorsement was during "Operation Chaos". John in the sand box of Maryland's eastern shore.
Post a New Response

(1343129)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by Olog-hai* on Sun Jan 31 09:07:27 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Jan 31 03:49:12 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Sanger was not Catholic. Her father was atheist and socialist.
Post a New Response

(1343133)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by R2ChinaTown* on Sun Jan 31 09:34:47 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by mtk52983 on Sun Jan 31 03:33:44 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d To be even more fair, PLANNED PARENTHOOD DOES NOT PERFORM MAMOGRAMS.
Post a New Response

(1343234)	view threaded
Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich
Posted by WillD* on Sun Jan 31 19:53:24 2016, in response to Re: New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jan 31 09:07:27 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d And what of her mother?
Post a New Response

(1344689)	view threaded
John Kasich says he "ought to be running in a Democratic primary"
Posted by Olog-hai* on Sat Feb 6 22:49:50 2016, in response to New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:07:42 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks, as the proverb says. CBS News John Kasich jokes about Democratic primary run in New Hampshire By Jacqueline Alemany February 06, 2016, 4:52 pm For John Kasich, there are no Hail Marys planned during his final sprint of the New Hampshire primary. "We're going to do really, really well up here, and there is no doubt in my mind about it," Kasich told a group of reporters following him around the state before Saturday's GOP primary debate. A relaxed-looking Kasich spent the day urging his volunteers to knock on doors before Tuesday's vote, urging them to greet voters with a smile. Voters, he noted, can be persuaded if they "have a sense of something special." During a stop at Manchester's Puritan Backroom Restaurant, Kasich made his way through a swarm of fans. "Can't you just stuff the ballot for me?" Kasich joked to a woman who told him she was a ballot counter. "I won't tell anyone — consider it done," she replied back to him. Kasich, who has appealed to voters across the ideological spectrum in an effort to attract independent voters, ran into yet another Democratic voter who told the Ohio governor that he's the only Republican he would vote for. "I ought to be running in a Democrat primary, I got more Democrats for me — you have any Republican friends?" Kasich jokingly replied. This came a day after the irreverent candidate started a snowball fight with staff and reporters. Later on, he became the first candidate to hit the 100-town-hall milestone in New Hampshire, which was celebrated at a crowded town hall on Friday night with "funfetti show" machine and Market Basket sheet cakes. The White Stripes rock song "Seven Nation Army" blared as Kasich bounded onto the stage after an introduction from Mike Vrabel, a former New England Patriots linebacker. "That has never happened before in American history," Kasich remarked about the indie hit being played at a Republican town hall. "New Hampshire has changed me," he said, taking a moment to reflect. "Everyone is beginning to talk about Kasich running a positive campaign, can it work? It would be really cool if it worked. And it if it doesn't, I'm blaming all of you," he joked.
Post a New Response

(1344706)	view threaded
Re: John Kasich says he ''ought to be running in a Democratic primary''
Posted by mtk52983* on Sun Feb 7 02:07:57 2016, in response to John Kasich says he "ought to be running in a Democratic primary", posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 6 22:49:50 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d It was a joke because he received the endorsement by the New York Times, the fact that he was responding to a Democrat who liked Kasich, etc.
Post a New Response

(1344737)	view threaded
Re: John Kasich says he ''ought to be running in a Democratic primary''
Posted by Olog-hai* on Sun Feb 7 10:44:59 2016, in response to Re: John Kasich says he ''ought to be running in a Democratic primary'', posted by mtk52983 on Sun Feb 7 02:07:57 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Many a true word has been spoken in jest.
Post a New Response

(1345041)	view threaded
John Kasich puts himself in between Hillary and Bernie in political terms
Posted by Olog-hai* on Mon Feb 8 15:44:41 2016, in response to New York Times endorses John Kasich, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jan 30 14:07:42 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d The Week John Kasich: I'm a good middle ground between Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders By Jeva Lange 02/08/2016 2:08 p.m. ET A possibly very confused voter at a John Kasich town hall in Windham, New Hampshire, wanted to know why she should vote for the Ohio governor in the "Democratic primary" — and Kasich, a Republican, didn't correct her. The question did not seem to be a slip of the tongue, either: The voter said she was having a hard time deciding between Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, and John Kasich in the "Democratic primary" and wanted to know why Kasich should have her vote. "Isn't that interesting," Kasich said as the crowd around her gasped. However, without mentioning his political allegiance or correcting the voter, Kasich went on to position himself as a good compromise between Sanders and Clinton saying, "One of them's too hot, one of them's too cold, but I've got the right temperature." When Kasich asked the voter how he did in convincing her, she awkwardly dodged by saying, "I'll let you know tomorrow." Watch the scene unfold, below.
Post a New Response

(1345045)	view threaded
Re: John Kasich puts himself in between Hillary and Bernie in political terms
Posted by AlM* on Mon Feb 8 15:57:08 2016, in response to John Kasich puts himself in between Hillary and Bernie in political terms, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 8 15:44:41 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Presumably a joke. Kasich is more conservative than Clinton.
Post a New Response

(1345050)	view threaded
Re: John Kasich puts himself in between Hillary and Bernie in political terms
Posted by SMAZ* on Mon Feb 8 16:34:50 2016, in response to John Kasich puts himself in between Hillary and Bernie in political terms, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Feb 8 15:44:41 2016.* fiogf49gjkf0d Just goes to show you how right-wing Hillary really is and how moderately center-left Bernie is.
Post a New Response

[1 2]
	Page 1 of 2	Next Page >

[ Return to the Message Index ]