Limbaugh rips Fox News for 'war on women' question

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/250586-limbaugh-rips-fox-news-for-war-on-women-question

August 07, 2015, 02:37 pm
Limbaugh rips Fox News for 'war on women' question
By Jesse Byrnes

Rush Limbaugh on Friday criticized Fox News after a moderator for the first GOP presidential debate the previous night raised the topic of a "war on women."

"If I didn't know any better, I would have watched this thing last night thinking that there is a Republican 'war on women' based on the questions and the
lack of a woman being on the stage," Limbaugh said on his radio show.

"I thought the 'war on women' was a Democrat creation by George Stephanopoulos," he added. "The last place I ever thought I would see it continued is Fox News."



Megyn Kelly, one of three moderators, used the phrase during an intense exchange with GOP front-runner Donald Trump minutes into the debate, after asking him about previous comments disparaging women's appearances.

"You once told a contestant on 'Celebrity Apprentice' it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president?" Kelly asked.

"And how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?" Kelly added as Trump stared straight forward.

Trump snapped at Kelly, the only woman who spoke during the event, saying, "I don’t, frankly, have time for total political correctness."

Limbaugh told listeners Friday that "Trump was clearly caught entirely off guard by it" but acknowledged later that all Republican candidates "have to be ready" for tough questions.

"I just think crying about the refs isn't going to get you anywhere," Limbaugh said, adding that he didn't think Trump was lamenting his treatment.

Limbaugh did not single out questions from the debate, but he alluded to Kelly's question of Trump.

Kelly also asked Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker: "Would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion?"

Trump, who has topped many recent national polls, has hit back hard on Fox News after receiving a series of pointed questions during the debate.

"I have never seen the kind of public backlash against Fox personalities that I have seen last night and today," Limbaugh said Friday, speculating Fox was urged to go after Trump during the first debate.



"I have never seen the kind of public backlash against Fox personalities that I have seen last night and today," Limbaugh said Friday, speculating Fox was urged to go after Trump during the first debate.

As usual Rush is dead on right. Fox and Kelly should have to pay for this IMHO.
I JUST DROPPED FOX FROM MY VIEWING!!!!! And that Kelly piece of shit (SOLD OUT SCUM) needs a damn fine ass stomping by some woman IMHO.-TYR

[Black Diamond]

As usual Rush is dead on right. Fox and Kelly should have to pay for this IMHO.
I JUST DROPPED FOX FROM MY VIEWING!!!!! And that Kelly piece of shit (SOLD OUT SCUM) needs a damn fine ass stomping by some woman IMHO.-TYR

Some of the debates will be on fox. How will you watch those?

[LongTermGuy]

Some of the debates will be on fox. How will you watch those?

​We just did....its not all of Fox....mostly the `self Promoting` "Deceitful" kelly chick...might have to hold our nose from the skank-stank

[Black Diamond]

​We just did....its not all of Fox....mostly the `self Promoting` "Deceitful" kelly chick...might have to hold our nose from the skank-stank

After the huge ratings, it's hard for me to believe they won't bring her back to moderate the next fox debate

[Thunderknuckles]

I agree that Fox seemed like they went after Trump but the Kelly's question, at its heart, is a good one. Do you trust a guy with Trump's temperament to handle delicate foreign policy issues. Frankly, I don't.
As for the Walker question, again it was a fair one. Walker has said he opposes abortion in all cases. So yeah, would he really be willing to let a mother die instead of having an abortion? Even the Catholic Church makes an exception for this. As I said in the other thread, I was glad to see tough questions from conservatives at FOX. Anything less is a disservice to voters.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I agree that Fox seemed like they went after Trump but the Kelly's question, at its heart, is a good one. Do you trust a guy with Trump's temperament to handle delicate foreign policy issues. Frankly, I don't.
As for the Walker question, again it was a fair one. Walker has said he opposes abortion in all cases. So yeah, would he really be willing to let a mother die instead of having an abortion? Even the Catholic Church makes an exception for this. As I said in the other thread, I was glad to see tough questions from conservatives at FOX. Anything less is a disservice to voters.
I trust him a thousand times more than I do obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It was more than tough questions, it was deliberate , agenda driven weeding or at least an attempt at it.
Just let me know when, if ever , any stinking, lousy piece of shit dem gets treated that way by either side!

Lets stop vetting out guys to the point to trying to crucify them when the stinking dems vet not at all
and get by with it . Why the hell should we help them in attacking our guys?
Don't they have enough help already with the sold out media and tens of millions in "kicked back" tax money.
Corruption so ffing deep heads should be rolling but nobody bats a damn eye!- Tyr

[LongTermGuy]

I trust him a thousand times more than I do obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It was more than tough questions, it was deliberate , agenda driven weeding or at least an attempt at it.
Just let me when, if ever , any stinking, lousy piece of shit dem gets treated that way by either side!

Lets stop vetting out guys to the point to trying to crucify them when the stinking dems vet not at all
and get by with it . Why the hell should ewe help them in attacking out guys?
Don't they have enough help already with the sold out media and tens of millions in "kicked back" tax money.
Corruption so ffing deep heads should be rolling but nobody bats a damn eye!- Tyr


:clap::clap::clap:

[NightTrain]

There is no doubt that there were tough questions fielded to the candidates, some of them I was surprised to hear asked.

But that's what these events are for, and I'm pretty sure that they're all going to get them asked again, with greater malice intended when the Big Boy debates occur.

Does anyone doubt that these questions won't be asked by Hillary when they really count in the 1-on-1 debates?

IMO, asking these hard questions now can only do the GOP field good instead of waiting for a hostile moderator to ask the question with no time to respond.

Besides that, FOX doesn't want to be seen as giving a bunch of softballs to Republicans, and honestly, I didn't want to see that either.

[Noir]

Awwwws, poor Trump, how dare a question be asked about comments he has made (with verbatim quotes)? So unfair on mr Trump.

[Kathianne]

There is no doubt that there were tough questions fielded to the candidates, some of them I was surprised to hear asked.

But that's what these events are for, and I'm pretty sure that they're all going to get them asked again, with greater malice intended when the Big Boy debates occur.

Does anyone doubt that these questions won't be asked by Hillary when they really count in the 1-on-1 debates?

IMO, asking these hard questions now can only do the GOP field good instead of waiting for a hostile moderator to ask the question with no time to respond.

Besides that, FOX doesn't want to be seen as giving a bunch of softballs to Republicans, and honestly, I didn't want to see that either.

As I said earlier, with 24 million watching, a lesson was here for all the networks which have not been getting ratings or attention. In order to build interest, there has to be tension. FOX questions didn't bring the tension, the candidates did through their comments and actions over years.

Vetting is exactly what is needed, it should have happened with the Obama, but didn't. It certainly is needed for Hillary, Sanders, Biden if he gets in. I wish it would be FOX type questions they face.

[Kathianne]

and regarding Trump and women:

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?50973-Trump-Disinvited-To-Red-State-Gathering

[Kathianne]

Rules:

Spamming - Anyone who joins the board solely to place a link and advertise will be banned permanently and their offending post deleted. * Additionally, taking a particular post and pasting it in various threads as a means of repeating is considered "spamming" the board and offending posts will likely be moderated and at the discretion of staff can be thread banned or board banned based on offending members history.


Closing dupe thread. Assuming poster did not read what has recently been added to rule above.

[Drummond]

Awwwws, poor Trump, how dare a question be asked about comments he has made (with verbatim quotes)? So unfair on mr Trump.

'No bias there, then', but of course .. eh, Noir ?

But this might be highly instructive as to the background behind Megyn Kelly's hostile and particularly personalised questioning of Mr Trump, explaining something of the truly 'attacking' intention. I'm fortunate enough to be on the Tea Party's mailing list, and so I received this link from them. See ....

http://www.teaparty.org/well-ya-know-might-explain-debate-fox-hillarys-9th-largest-donor-113225/


If you were wondering why Brett Baier and Megan Kelly did all they could to kneecap Trump last night, maybe this news will help to explain it.

“According to Federal Election Commission and Center for Responsive Politics data, 21st Century Fox News Corp. has donated more than $3 million to Clinton family accounts. Overall, this lands Fox as the Clinton family’s 9th largest donor over the course of the family’s political involvement.”


<thead style="box-sizing: border-box; vertical-align: top; outline: none !important;">
Clintons (to all accounts since 1992)

Amount

Obama (2012)

Amount


</thead><tbody tabindex="0" style="box-sizing: border-box; vertical-align: top; outline: none !important;">
Newsweb

$25,100,000*

University of California

$1,212,245



Slim Fast

$6,008,430

Microsoft Corp.

$814,645



American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

$5,350,000

Google Inc.

$801,770



Coca-Cola Company

$5,250,001

U.S. Government

$728,647



Goldman Sachs

$4,960,000

Harvard University

$668,368



Citigroup

$3,876,000

Kaiser Permanente

$588,386



Service Employees International Union

$3,832,867

Stanford University

$512,356



Communications Workers of America

$3,662,175

Deloitte LLP

$456,975



21st Century Fox / News Corp

$3,002,926

Columbia University

$455,309



Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

$2,658,537

Time Warner

$442,271



Loral Space & Communications

$2,606,501

U.S. Dept of State

$417,629



Walt Disney Co.

$2,459,345

DLA Piper

$401,890



Dreamworks SKG

$2,422,915

Sidley Austin LLP

$400,883



Time Warner

$2,365,930

Walt Disney Co.

$369,598



AT&T Inc.

$2,262,722

IBM Corp.

$369,491



United Food & Commercial Workers Union

$2,100,883

University of Chicago

$357,185



National Education Association

$2,041,463

University of Michigan

$339,806



American Federation of Teachers

$2,036,000

Comcast Corp.

$337,628



Cisco Systems

$1,845,000

U.S. Dept of Justice

$334,659



Joseph E Seagram & Sons

$1,747,945

U.S. Dept of Health & Human Services

$309,956


</tbody>
Note: Corporate and union donations include those from companies, foundations and employees.
Rupert Murdoch (owns Fox) and Valerie Jarrett (Obama’s chief of staff and right-hand Iranian in the White House) are “close”, share mutual friendship. That’s all you need to know, folks. The fix is in.

They want to destroy Trump, and coronate their Stepford Candidate, Jeb Bush. Time to WAKE UP. Spread this far and wide on social media so people know what’s going on, and why.
It’s all about illegal immigration — both Jarrett and Murdoch are BIG on illegals, and that’s why Bush is the man.


Favouring one candidate over another is one thing. Playing a chess game that involves donating great sums of money to an account linked to a RIVAL PARTY'S CANDIDATE, behind the scenes (& especially a Leftie !!!) to skew towards one favoured policy direction, is outright disgusting.

Goes to show - I had a lot of respect for Fox News before I read this. Seems I'll have to think again !

[Noir]

'No bias there, then', but of course .. eh, Noir ?

But this might be highly instructive as to the background behind Megyn Kelly's hostile and particularly personalised questioning of Mr Trump, explaining something of the truly 'attacking' intention. I'm fortunate enough to be on the Tea Party's mailing list, and so I received this link from them. See ....

http://www.teaparty.org/well-ya-know-might-explain-debate-fox-hillarys-9th-largest-donor-113225/



Favouring one candidate over another is one thing. Playing a chess game that involves donating great sums of money to an account linked to a RIVAL PARTY'S CANDIDATE, behind the scenes (& especially a Leftie !!!) to skew towards one favoured policy direction, is outright disgusting.

Goes to show - I had a lot of respect for Fox News before I read this. Seems I'll have to think again !

So you believe it's a webbed conspiracy, involving Fox News trying to promote Hilary Clintion by quoting Donald Trump quotes to Donald Trump?

you are aware Donald Trump has made large donations to the Clintons? Maybe you should add him to the conspiracy web...after all he's also the source of the quotes! It all makes sense now ;D

[Drummond]

So you believe it's a webbed conspiracy, involving Fox News trying to promote Hilary Clintion by quoting Donald Trump quotes to Donald Trump?

you are aware Donald Trump has made large donations to the Clintons? Maybe you should add him to the conspiracy web...after all he's also the source of the quotes! It all makes sense now ;D

You're still following your pro-Leftie agenda, but of course.

I'm gratified. It speaks in Trump's favour that the Left tries so very hard to discredit him .. and so much effort, so early in the campaign trail, too.

I wonder if 'Have I Got News For You' (a BBC programme) will try as hard to ridicule Trump, as they so persistently did against GW Bush.

[Noir]

You're still following your pro-Leftie agenda, but of course.

I'm gratified. It speaks in Trump's favour that the Left tries so very hard to discredit him .. and so much effort, so early in the campaign trail, too.

I wonder if 'Have I Got News For You' will try as hard to ridicule Trump, as they so persistently did against GW Bush.

See, y'all have this loop going - Any criticism of Trump is part of the 'leftie agenda' even when it comes form the likes of Fox news.
Even quoting things Trump has said -word for word- is part of this 'agenda'.
This kind of thinking verges on delusional.

[tailfins]

You're still following your pro-Leftie agenda, but of course.

I'm gratified. It speaks in Trump's favour that the Left tries so very hard to discredit him .. and so much effort, so early in the campaign trail, too.

I wonder if 'Have I Got News For You' (a BBC programme) will try as hard to ridicule Trump, as they so persistently did against GW Bush.

If Trump serves any purpose it's to give someone like Ted Cruz a chance to play "Good Cop, Bad Cop". Trump sucks all the oxygen out of the room regarding criticizing conservative positions as anti-woman, anti-gay, anti working people and anti everybody. We need someone with a proven conservative record. Talking the talk isn't good enough; we need someone that walks the walk. Trump's a fake.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

See, y'all have this loop going - Any criticism of Trump is part of the 'leftie agenda' even when it comes form the likes of Fox news.
Even quoting things Trump has said -word for word- is part of this 'agenda'.
This kind of thinking verges on delusional.


See, y'all have this loop going
^^^^ Utter bullshit dude.

Truth is truth and Facts are facts. Nobody has loop going that I am aware of. Why not make that same false accusation against the Trump haters???
Answer- Because being a liberal, socialist type you hate Trump for his capitalistic ways and views. Also because he would destroy HELLORY should he get the nomination.
Hellory which I am sure you view very, very favorably.......
Politics are a dirty and corrupt business and nobody does the corrupt part better or more often than the ffing Dems.
Fox is owned by Murdoch and Murdoch favors illegal immigration=== nuff said..-Tyr

[Drummond]

^^^^ Utter bullshit dude.

Truth is truth and Facts are facts. Nobody has loop going that I am aware of. Why not make that same false accusation against the Trump haters???
Answer- Because be a liberal socialist type you have Trump for his capitalistic ways and views. Also because he would destroy HELLORY should he get the nomination.
Hellory which I am sure you view very, very favorably.......
Politics are a dirty and corrupt business and nobody does the corrupt part better or more often than the ffing Dems.
Fox is owned by Murdoch and Murdoch favors illegal immigration=== nuff said..-Tyr:clap::clap::clap::clap:

[Noir]

^^^^ Utter bullshit dude.

Truth is truth and Facts are facts. Nobody has loop going that I am aware of. Why not make that same false accusation against the Trump haters???
Answer- Because be a liberal socialist type you have Trump for his capitalistic ways and views. Also because he would destroy HELLORY should he get the nomination.

Couldn't give a damn about his capitalist ways, do give a damn about the way he talks about women.

As i said, merely quote what Trump says is regarded as an unfair attack, do you consider that reasonable?


Hellory which I am sure you view very, very favorably.......

You are very, very wrong...but what's new ;D

[Drummond]

See, y'all have this loop going - Any criticism of Trump is part of the 'leftie agenda' even when it comes form the likes of Fox news.
Even quoting things Trump has said -word for word- is part of this 'agenda'.
This kind of thinking verges on delusional.

The Republican Candidate debate - as is typical of such forums on our side of the Pond, as well as over in America - was geared to our seeing candidates quizzed on their political stances. Ah, BUT .. when it came to Trump, the questioning from Megyn K was devoted to a personal attack, one NOT including a question on a political stance !!

Imagine someone like David Dimbleby, or Julie Etchingham, permitting something equally as personalised in any of OUR debates, Noir ! Except, YOU CAN'T, because it would've never happened.

Ah, but, when it comes to Trump, suddenly you overlook all of that ..

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Couldn't give a damn about his capitalist ways, do give a damn about the way he talks about women.
So you bought into the war on women crap, eh?
I think he is a bit much in how he speaks but his candor also points to a man far more honest than any politician since Lincoln IMHO. A very strong plus in my book.


You are very, very wrong...but what's new ;D

Clever little retort, but its also a lie. I am by no means perfect but to say I am "by and large" very wrong the majority of the time is truly a damn lie.
Thats your belief , keep it but I say its utter rot.. -Tyr

Perhaps if you ever woke up, you'd learn something useful instead of PC type appeasement,
and liberal lies.--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The Republican Candidate debate - as is typical of such forums on our side of the Pond, as well as over in America - was geared to our seeing candidates quizzed on their political stances. Ah, BUT .. when it came to Trump, the questioning from Megyn K was devoted to a personal attack, one NOT including a question on a political stance !!

Imagine someone like David Dimbleby, or Julie Etchingham, permitting something equally as personalised in any of OUR debates, Noir ! Except, YOU CAN'T, because it would've never happened.

Ah, but, when it comes to Trump, suddenly you overlook all of that ..

They erroneously justify it as a question on a "political stance" because they buy into the dem strategy on the false charge of Republicans engaging in a -"war on women" . Which in my view makes them doubly wrong!
The war on women accusation, a dem strategy, to garner the vast majority of the women vote for the dem candidate.
Remember obama won both times due primarily to to groups--blacks and women!!
They view the black vote as a solid lock , so they desperately seek the female vote!

Why "others" go along with that lie beats me. Its as if media hypes it-it must be true!
Utterly sickening to see some people buy into it as it has been sold!--Tyr

[Noir]

The Republican Candidate debate - as is typical of such forums on our side of the Pond, as well as over in America - was geared to our seeing candidates quizzed on their political stances. Ah, BUT .. when it came to Trump, the questioning from Megyn K was devoted to a personal attack, one NOT including a question on a political stance !!

Imagine someone like David Dimbleby, or Julie Etchingham, permitting something equally as personalised in any of OUR debates, Noir ! Except, YOU CAN'T, because it would've never happened.

Ah, but, when it comes to Trump, suddenly you overlook all of that ..

I understand that you don't think its important what his stance is on women. But it is.

[Drummond]

Perhaps if you ever woke up, you'd learn something useful instead of PC type appeasement,
and liberal lies.--Tyr

... well, it WOULD mean being weaned off of the BBC's output, involving years of gradual adjustment, because of the sheer shock value of a worldview not dominated by Obama broadcasts !!!!

Hey, Tyr .. did you see my posting about Michelle Obama's 'briefing' lecture ? I last posted that the BBC had transmitted it (on the BBC Parliament Channel) a total of SIX times.

They're still at it .. !!!!! Six broadcasts of the very SAME speech, of a speech given to an audience of girls at a school in Tower Hamlets (.. so, not exactly earth-shattering stuff ..) .. and now, another FOUR of them, over this coming week.

TEN rebroadcasts in all, that I'm aware of, and that may not be the last of them !!!!!

[Drummond]

I understand that you don't think its important what his stance is on women. But it is.

Political Party stances, Noir, and a candidate-by-candidate's comparison between them. THAT is what's asked at such meetings. What Trump got was something different - an attack on him, personally. That, Noir, is the truth of this.

No wonder you're so much in favour of what happened.

[Noir]

... well, it WOULD mean being weaned off of the BBC's output, involving years of gradual adjustment, because of the sheer shock value of a worldview not dominated by Obama broadcasts !!!!

Hey, Tyr .. did you see my posting about Michelle Obama's 'briefing' lecture ? I last posted that the BBC had transmitted it (on the BBC Parliament Channel) a total of SIX times.

They're still at it .. !!!!! Six broadcasts of the very SAME speech, of a speech given to an audience of girls at a school in Tower Hamlets (.. so, not exactly earth-shattering stuff ..) .. and now, another FOUR of them, over this coming week.

TEN rebroadcasts in all, that I'm aware of, and that may not be the last of them !!!!!

I'm convinced you watch a lot more BBC than i do, especially given how much you post about them and their schedule.

I'm trying to recall when i last watched a BBC news broadcast, it was almost certainly the election count...and before that, er....

[Drummond]

I'm convinced you watch a lot more BBC than i do, especially given how much you post about them and their schedule.

I'm trying to recall when i last watched a BBC news broadcast, it was almost certainly the election count...and before that, er....

Do you include iPlayer replays in that ? And, YES .. the Michelle Obama 'briefing' is included THERE, too, the last time I checked. Just think ... you could watch her 24 hours a day, from that medium !

How about LBC radio ? These days, it achieves national output (and it has its own Internet stream as well). James O'Brien is as Leftie as it gets .. some of his stuff makes the BBC seem neutral !!

I'll just bet you're a Corbyn supporter.

[tailfins]

I understand that you don't think its important what his stance is on women. But it is.

You should like Trump, then. He's pro-abortion. He favors tax increases to fund women's programs and other programs. Learn to overlook the talk. All he is doing is throwing red meat to gullible conservatives. Once elected, Trump will be every bit the force for social justice that Obama is.

[Noir]

Do you include iPlayer replays in that ?

Yes.


How about LBC radio ? These days, it achieves national output (and it has its own Internet stream as well). James O'Brien is as Leftie as it gets .. some of his stuff makes the BBC seem neutral !!

Never heard of it before, I'd listen occasionally to BBC Radio 4 - For the likes of The News Quiz and The Infinite Monkey cage.


I'll just bet you're a Corbyn supporter.

I'd be very interested in taking you up on this bet, the higher the wager the better.

[fj1200]

speculating Fox

As usual...

We go from speculating to...


Truth is truth and Facts are facts.

... "truth and fact" awfully quick.


Favouring one candidate over another is one thing. Playing a chess game that involves donating great sums of money to an account linked to a RIVAL PARTY'S CANDIDATE, behind the scenes (& especially a Leftie !!!) to skew towards one favoured policy direction, is outright disgusting.

His recipients? A who's who of lefties.


The Democratic recipients of Trump’s donations make up what looks like a Republican enemies list, including former senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton)(N.Y.), Sen. John F. Kerry (http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/John_F._Kerry) (Mass.), Rep. Charles B. Rangel (http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Charles_B._Rangel) (N.Y.), Sen.Charles E. Schumer (http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Charles_E._Schumer)(N.Y.) and the late liberal lion Edward M. Kennedy (http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Edward_M._Kennedy)(Mass.).The biggest recipient of all has been the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee of New York, (http://newyorksenatedems.com/splash/signup/splash01/index.pl)which has taken in more than $125,000 from Trump and his companies. Overall, Trump has given nearly $600,000 to New York state campaigns, with more than two-thirds going to Democrats.
His representatives did not respond to requests for comment Tuesday. But Trump said in a recent interview that he had relatively few Republican options in an overwhelmingly blue state.
“Everyone’s Democratic,” he told Fox News in an interview (http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/transcript/exclusive-donald-trump-talks-2012-calls-obama-worst-president-ever?page=2)about his potential candidacy. “So what am I going to do — contribute to Republicans? One thing: I’m not stupid. Am I going to contribute to Republicans for my whole life when they get heat when they run against some Democrat and the most they can get is 1 percent of the vote?”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-donation-history-shows-democratic-favoritism/2011/04/25/AFDUddtE_story.html

Campaign contributions for political expediency. Disgusting.

And it's amazing how fast Fox News is now the enemy.

[Drummond]

You should like Trump, then. He's pro-abortion. He favors tax increases to fund women's programs and other programs. Learn to overlook the talk. All he is doing is throwing red meat to gullible conservatives. Once elected, Trump will be every bit the force for social justice that Obama is.

A simplistic examination - as I've just seen from the candidates' comparison site I posted a link to, several days back.

Trump isn't totally opposed to abortion, but neither is he particularly 'pro', either. Observe, from ---

http://presidential-candidates.insidegov.com/l/70/Donald-Trump



<tbody>
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right - Opposes



Ideology Score

<svg class="viz speed-viz" style="width: 90px" height="90"><g stroke="#bbb" stroke-width="2" transform="scale(0.9)"><circle cx="50" cy="40" r="4" stroke-width="0" fill="#bbb"></circle><line x1="24.920473174376628" y1="58.22134282106667" x2="20.066371208126945" y2="61.74805433482151"></line><line x1="20.51724799485024" y1="49.579526825623375" x2="14.810908897079322" y2="51.43362879187306"></line><line x1="19" y1="40.00000000000001" x2="13" y2="40.00000000000001"></line><line x1="20.517247994850237" y1="30.42047317437663" x2="14.810908897079315" y2="28.566371208126952"></line><line x1="24.920473174376628" y1="21.778657178933337" x2="20.066371208126945" y2="18.251945665178496"></line><line x1="31.77865717893333" y1="14.920473174376632" x2="28.25194566517849" y2="10.066371208126949"></line><line x1="40.420473174376625" y1="10.51724799485024" x2="38.56637120812694" y2="4.810908897079322"></line><line x1="49.99999999999999" y1="9" x2="49.99999999999999" y2="3"></line><line x1="59.57952682562336" y1="10.517247994850237" x2="61.43362879187305" y2="4.810908897079315"></line><line x1="68.22134282106666" y1="14.920473174376625" x2="71.74805433482149" y2="10.066371208126942"></line><line x1="75.07952682562336" y1="21.778657178933326" x2="79.93362879187305" y2="18.251945665178486"></line><line x1="79.48275200514976" y1="30.420473174376625" x2="85.18909110292068" y2="28.566371208126938"></line><line x1="81" y1="39.99999999999999" x2="87" y2="39.99999999999999"></line><line x1="79.48275200514976" y1="49.57952682562336" x2="85.18909110292068" y2="51.43362879187305"></line><line x1="75.07952682562338" y1="58.221342821066656" x2="79.93362879187306" y2="61.7480543348215"></line><line x1="50" y1="40" x2="80.02607799498757" y2="32.29061349788954" stroke-width="3" stroke="#bbb"></line></g></svg>6




</tbody>


<tbody>

<tbody>
Candidate's View
Position


Ban late abortions; exceptions for rape, incest or health
Strongly opposes abortion rights


Favors abortion rights but respects opposition
Favors abortion rights


I am now pro-life; after years of being pro-choice
Strongly opposes abortion rights


I am pro-life; fight ObamaCare abortion funding.
Opposes abortion right

</tbody>


</tbody>

[tailfins]

A simplistic examination - as I've just seen from the candidates' comparison site I posted a link to, several days back.

Trump isn't totally opposed to abortion, but neither is he particularly 'pro', either. Observe, from ---

http://presidential-candidates.insidegov.com/l/70/Donald-Trump



<tbody>
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right - Opposes



Ideology Score

<svg class="viz speed-viz" style="width: 90px" height="90"><g stroke="#bbb" stroke-width="2" transform="scale(0.9)"><circle cx="50" cy="40" r="4" stroke-width="0" fill="#bbb"></circle><line x1="24.920473174376628" y1="58.22134282106667" x2="20.066371208126945" y2="61.74805433482151"></line><line x1="20.51724799485024" y1="49.579526825623375" x2="14.810908897079322" y2="51.43362879187306"></line><line x1="19" y1="40.00000000000001" x2="13" y2="40.00000000000001"></line><line x1="20.517247994850237" y1="30.42047317437663" x2="14.810908897079315" y2="28.566371208126952"></line><line x1="24.920473174376628" y1="21.778657178933337" x2="20.066371208126945" y2="18.251945665178496"></line><line x1="31.77865717893333" y1="14.920473174376632" x2="28.25194566517849" y2="10.066371208126949"></line><line x1="40.420473174376625" y1="10.51724799485024" x2="38.56637120812694" y2="4.810908897079322"></line><line x1="49.99999999999999" y1="9" x2="49.99999999999999" y2="3"></line><line x1="59.57952682562336" y1="10.517247994850237" x2="61.43362879187305" y2="4.810908897079315"></line><line x1="68.22134282106666" y1="14.920473174376625" x2="71.74805433482149" y2="10.066371208126942"></line><line x1="75.07952682562336" y1="21.778657178933326" x2="79.93362879187305" y2="18.251945665178486"></line><line x1="79.48275200514976" y1="30.420473174376625" x2="85.18909110292068" y2="28.566371208126938"></line><line x1="81" y1="39.99999999999999" x2="87" y2="39.99999999999999"></line><line x1="79.48275200514976" y1="49.57952682562336" x2="85.18909110292068" y2="51.43362879187305"></line><line x1="75.07952682562338" y1="58.221342821066656" x2="79.93362879187306" y2="61.7480543348215"></line><line x1="50" y1="40" x2="80.02607799498757" y2="32.29061349788954" stroke-width="3" stroke="#bbb"></line></g></svg>6




</tbody>


<tbody>

<tbody>
Candidate's View
Position


Ban late abortions; exceptions for rape, incest or health
Strongly opposes abortion rights


Favors abortion rights but respects opposition
Favors abortion rights


I am now pro-life; after years of being pro-choice
Strongly opposes abortion rights


I am pro-life; fight ObamaCare abortion funding.
Opposes abortion right

</tbody>


</tbody>


Trump trades in points of view like a used automobile. You are displaying the 2015 model.

[Drummond]

We go from speculating to...



... "truth and fact" awfully quick.



His recipients? A who's who of lefties.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-donation-history-shows-democratic-favoritism/2011/04/25/AFDUddtE_story.html

Campaign contributions for political expediency. Disgusting.

And it's amazing how fast Fox News is now the enemy.

It is, indeed, amazing how fast Fox News became the enemy. I have to agree with you there.

All the more shocking that they were behind - and instituted - the hostile questioning that they did.

Rather less shocking, though, to reflect on how your, and Noir's, position on this appear to be dovetailing.

[fj1200]

Trump trades in points of view like a used automobile. You are displaying the 2015 model.

And what does he know of SCOTUS appointments? That will be where the rubber will meet the road.

[Drummond]

Trump trades in points of view like a used automobile. You are displaying the 2015 model.

A Conservative who remains grounded in the real world, not fossilised behind old propagandist stances and a prisoner of them, certainly helps his (or her) capacity for REMAINING a good Conservative. I've been arguing that for a long time.

If, as you say, I'm 'displaying the 2015 model', then you're saying that I'm up to date. You're saying that you, were not ?

[tailfins]

It is, indeed, amazing how fast Fox News became the enemy. I have to agree with you there.

All the more shocking that they were behind - and instituted - the hostile questioning that they did.

Rather less shocking, though, to reflect on how your, and Noir's, position on this appear to be dovetailing.

Megyn Kelly's analysis was NOT good reporting. Her material looks like it came from an intern. Any idiot can watch Apprentice re-runs and look at Facebook. How about doing some REAL investigative journalism on Trump's FOUR bankruptcies?

[fj1200]

It is, indeed, amazing how fast Fox News became the enemy. I have to agree with you there.

All the more shocking that they were behind - and instituted - the hostile questioning that they did.

Rather less shocking, though, to reflect on how your, and Noir's, position on this appear to be dovetailing.

They didn't change. Your, and others, viewpoint did.

And shockingly, you have no clue about how noir and myself differ.

[Drummond]

I argued elsewhere that my idea of a 'Dream Team' could be Trump & Santorum. Then, I was chiefly thinking that Santorum's totally committed and realistically strong pro-foreign policy stances, centred on security issues, just couldn't be beaten.

Santorum - I now learn - would provide Trump with the same balancing-influence on this subject, too ...

http://presidential-candidates.insidegov.com/compare/58-70/Rick-Santorum-vs-Donald-Trump



<tbody>
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right - Strongly Opposes



Ideology Score

<svg class="viz speed-viz" style="width: 90px" height="90"><g stroke="#bbb" stroke-width="2" transform="scale(0.9)"><circle cx="50" cy="40" r="4" stroke-width="0" fill="#bbb"></circle><line x1="24.920473174376628" y1="58.22134282106667" x2="20.066371208126945" y2="61.74805433482151"></line><line x1="20.51724799485024" y1="49.579526825623375" x2="14.810908897079322" y2="51.43362879187306"></line><line x1="19" y1="40.00000000000001" x2="13" y2="40.00000000000001"></line><line x1="20.517247994850237" y1="30.42047317437663" x2="14.810908897079315" y2="28.566371208126952"></line><line x1="24.920473174376628" y1="21.778657178933337" x2="20.066371208126945" y2="18.251945665178496"></line><line x1="31.77865717893333" y1="14.920473174376632" x2="28.25194566517849" y2="10.066371208126949"></line><line x1="40.420473174376625" y1="10.51724799485024" x2="38.56637120812694" y2="4.810908897079322"></line><line x1="49.99999999999999" y1="9" x2="49.99999999999999" y2="3"></line><line x1="59.57952682562336" y1="10.517247994850237" x2="61.43362879187305" y2="4.810908897079315"></line><line x1="68.22134282106666" y1="14.920473174376625" x2="71.74805433482149" y2="10.066371208126942"></line><line x1="75.07952682562336" y1="21.778657178933326" x2="79.93362879187305" y2="18.251945665178486"></line><line x1="79.48275200514976" y1="30.420473174376625" x2="85.18909110292068" y2="28.566371208126938"></line><line x1="81" y1="39.99999999999999" x2="87" y2="39.99999999999999"></line><line x1="79.48275200514976" y1="49.57952682562336" x2="85.18909110292068" y2="51.43362879187305"></line><line x1="75.07952682562338" y1="58.221342821066656" x2="79.93362879187306" y2="61.7480543348215"></line><line x1="50" y1="40" x2="75.07952682562336" y2="58.221342821066685" stroke-width="3" stroke="#bbb"></line></g></svg>10




</tbody>


<tbody>

<tbody>
Candidate's View
Position


93% of abortions are post-conception birth control
Strongly opposes abortion rights


I've not only taken the pledge; I've taken the bullets
Strongly opposes abortion rights


No abortions even in cases of rape; one violence is enough
Strongly opposes abortion rights

</tbody>


</tbody>

[Drummond]

Post duplicated .. ignore.

[fj1200]

^A Democratic ticket "Dream Team" more accurately.

[Drummond]

^A Democratic ticket "Dream Team" more accurately.

As untrue a statement, FJ, as you've ever posted !!

Defend it if you can !! While you're at it, try convincing me that Santorum is a closet Leftie (... as someone well able to comment on these things ...).

[fj1200]

As untrue a statement, FJ, as you've ever posted !!

Defend it if you can !! While you're at it, try convincing me that Santorum is a closet Leftie (... as someone well able to comment on these things ...).

I didn't suggest he was a closet leftie. You might want to think about this one for a little while before you let loose with another incorrect knee-jerk reply.

[Drummond]

I didn't suggest he was a closet leftie. You might want to think about this one for a little while before you let loose with another incorrect knee-jerk reply.

No defence, then. Yet another of my challenges you've managed to duck !

I have a theory about you, which is gaining ground with your continued posting.

You snipe at others' postings .. you try to deconstruct arguments offered, or just punch holes through them. What you avoid doing, at least to a detailed extent, if you can, is offer your own thoughts and opinions, especially unbidden .. because in doing that, you'd be revealing your thought-processes with some depth. This - you cannot allow. It'd be too much of a giveaway.

[Noir]

93% of abortions are post-conception birth control.
No abortions, even in the case of rape.

Well this man seems sane. :salute:

[Drummond]

Megyn Kelly's analysis was NOT good reporting. Her material looks like it came from an intern. Any idiot can watch Apprentice re-runs and look at Facebook. How about doing some REAL investigative journalism on Trump's FOUR bankruptcies?

On your last point .. no need. After all, if you're correct, the experiences he'll have had just add to his life-experience grounding.

Consider how much Trump is worth today. Now .. don't you want a SUCCESS STORY to be running for President, someone whose strengths make him triumph over adversity ?

[Drummond]

They didn't change. Your, and others, viewpoint did.

And shockingly, you have no clue about how noir and myself differ.

What a ridiculous claim !!

OF COURSE I know how you, and Noir, differ. He's British. You are not. Despite not being British, you still have the gall - and the illogic, not to mention temerity !! - to bill yourself as the 'One True Thatcherite'. Noir has never done that, and I'm sure he never will.

I can more usefully rely on Noir's representations of himself than I ever could your own.

[fj1200]

No defence, then. Yet another of my challenges you've managed to duck !

Your ignorant imagination is not my fault nor is your inability to comprehend.


... than I ever could your own.

That is because your head is in the sand and you ignore what proves you wrong or what you don't understand. My proof is your constant avoidance of backing up all your accusations.

[gabosaurus]

I wonder if Trump realizes how much of his current support comes from Dems who are practically begging the GOP to nominate him.
Regardless of how Trump's opinions resonate with Republicans, he has zero chance of winning the general election. None. Democrats know this.
Bernie Sanders appeals to a lot of Democrats. But the majority know that Sanders can't win the general elections.

Trump's only appeal is to the far right. Say what you want about his wealth, his business acumen and his ability to work with people and produce good results. Trump has unpopular opinions and pisses people off.
A Trump candidacy guarantees four or more years of Dem control of the White House and possibly Congress as well. Let's not forget the Supreme Court judges that will likely retire over the next term.