Democrats are supposed to be better than republicans. We agree that the GOP clown-car shit-show of a primary looks bad for them. Democrats are supposed to be better than that; not use the GOP stupidity as some sort of a benchmark.
You're wrong. Is this written somewhere in the Democratic supporters' handbook, or something you've dreamed up? I have a hunch why you would push for this. Democratic policies are better, absolutely. But the broader issue for me was: with all things being equal, what missteps by Republican candidates would make them to have to "do something?" or not go in a general election "weak and limping." Frankly, the situation is more dire for them.
I thought Cruz's comments on abortion in cases of rape (http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/cruz-makes-his-case-against-abortion-rape-exception)would be more of a possible crippling position for Cruz in a general election. Republicans traditionally have run to the right in their primaries to win, but then have to run themselves ragged pivoting to the middle in the general, and they loose because they don't have much in the way of credibility. With Cruz's no-rape-exception comments, he's at an extreme spot from the start. As the link states, that's pretty radical for even the Republican party.
Pretty typical Clinton-ite remarks tho. Whenever she gets in trouble for things she has done she highlights how they aren't as bad as the republicans.
I didn't bring up Hillary in Ted Cruz's rape comment on abortion; you made that connection and went off on a tangent. In the context of this post/ threads, I'm not even sure what "trouble" Hillary is in, other than her recent losses to Bernie, so she could be going into the general election "weak and limping."
"No abortions for women who are raped," I think the Democratic candidates are in total agreement opposing Ted Cruz's policy; and I can't believe it wouldn't be mentioned in a campaign or brought up. The Democratic position on the issue is a winning one.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2016-04-07 09:12 pm (UTC)You're wrong. Is this written somewhere in the Democratic supporters' handbook, or something you've dreamed up? I have a hunch why you would push for this. Democratic policies are better, absolutely. But the broader issue for me was: with all things being equal, what missteps by Republican candidates would make them to have to "do something?" or not go in a general election "weak and limping." Frankly, the situation is more dire for them.
I thought Cruz's comments on abortion in cases of rape (http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/cruz-makes-his-case-against-abortion-rape-exception)would be more of a possible crippling position for Cruz in a general election. Republicans traditionally have run to the right in their primaries to win, but then have to run themselves ragged pivoting to the middle in the general, and they loose because they don't have much in the way of credibility. With Cruz's no-rape-exception comments, he's at an extreme spot from the start. As the link states, that's pretty radical for even the Republican party.
Pretty typical Clinton-ite remarks tho. Whenever she gets in trouble for things she has done she highlights how they aren't as bad as the republicans.
I didn't bring up Hillary in Ted Cruz's rape comment on abortion; you made that connection and went off on a tangent. In the context of this post/ threads, I'm not even sure what "trouble" Hillary is in, other than her recent losses to Bernie, so she could be going into the general election "weak and limping."
"No abortions for women who are raped," I think the Democratic candidates are in total agreement opposing Ted Cruz's policy; and I can't believe it wouldn't be mentioned in a campaign or brought up. The Democratic position on the issue is a winning one.