2012 Presidential Election Thread......

[Boz]

Sept 23, 2011 13:34:29 GMT -5 hoyainspirit said:

Sept 23, 2011 12:29:49 GMT -5 williambraskyiii said:

I continue to be borderline appalled by the crowds at these debates. Booing the openly gay soldier asking a question from the Middle East was the latest in a line of embarrassing incidents.

This. And not one candidate had the balls to comment on that sad audience action or the previous audience incidents.

I do not disagree with either of you about the audience behavior, but I think you should be also appalled at the recent behavior of members of the CBC and the fact that not one President of the United States or Senate Majority Leader or House Minority Leader had the balls to comment on those sad sad actions by elected representatives of the people.

[Cambridge]

It was a missed opportunity for a candidate to step up and defend that serviceman and chide the audience. It could have been a breakthrough moment for whoever it had been nationally. Maybe not in the primary, but it would have raised the interest of the independents and moderates.

How long has it been since we had a Republican primary without a military veteran? I can't imagine that McCain would have let that go without making a statement.

Edit: I forgot that Paul served in Vietnam as a flight surgeon. But, I guess he's not the type of vet to be very vet oriented.

[EasyEd]

Mitt went a long way toward securing the nomination last night, partly because Perry did so awful again. Despite the fact he has no chance at the nomination, Herman Cain continues to be a delightful addition to the list of candidates. Though I agree with him on most issues, Santorum looks like someone wound up so tight he's ready to explode. However, the questioning by Fox News seemed more gotcha questions rather than providing an opportunity for the candidates to talk about the issues. Foreign policy was almost neglected except for the Israel question and a bit about Afghanistan. For a hearing-challenged old guy like me some of the youtube questions, along with Meghan Kelly's questions, were not clear enough to understand the questions. The interruptions by Shannon Bream, though delightful to see, served no useful purpose.

For those who did not watch it, the best line of the night was something like "my next door neighbor's dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than President Obama".

[Boz]

I like Herman Cain a lot. He's clueless on foreign policy, pretty much by his own admission, but I think he could contribute a lot on the domestic side in an administration if a Republican (yes, still most likely Romney) is able to defeat Obama.

[jerseyhoya34]

Sept 23, 2011 11:33:51 GMT -5 rosslynhoya said:

Sept 22, 2011 19:51:03 GMT -5 @jerseyhoya34 said:

Of the 220+ executed in Perry's Texas is at least one whose innocence is all but established at this point - Cameron Todd Willingham. Perry's interference with the subsequent review of the case (post-execution) says a lot.

"All but established" is some kind of fancy lawyer talk that means the same thing as "not established" right? No wonder law school takes three years.

I'm glad that not all Republicans treat life and death issues with such flippancy. The Willingham case has been the subject of much media attention, including in a lengthy New Yorker piece (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann) and a Frontline documentary.

One key conclusion:
In 2005, Texas established a government commission to investigate allegations of error and misconduct by forensic scientists. The first cases that are being reviewed by the commission are those of Willingham and Willis. In mid-August, the noted fire scientist Craig Beyler, who was hired by the commission, completed his investigation. In a scathing report, he concluded that investigators in the Willingham case had no scientific basis for claiming that the fire was arson, ignored evidence that contradicted their theory, had no comprehension of flashover and fire dynamics, relied on discredited folklore, and failed to eliminate potential accidental or alternative causes of the fire. He said that Vasquez’s approach seemed to deny “rational reasoning” and was more “characteristic of mystics or psychics.” What’s more, Beyler determined that the investigation violated, as he put it to me, “not only the standards of today but even of the time period.” The commission is reviewing his findings, and plans to release its own report next year. Some legal scholars believe that the commission may narrowly assess the reliability of the scientific evidence. There is a chance, however, that Texas could become the first state to acknowledge officially that, since the advent of the modern judicial system, it had carried out the “execution of a legally and factually innocent person.”

* * * * *

Unfortunately, this kind of analysis was not performed in advance of trial, and, yes, Willingham can/should blame his lawyers (if he were alive). Interesting read for folks interested in science/forensics as well. As to the commission installed in 2005, the commissioners have been replaced by the Governor's Office, and a report of the new commission has not been forthcoming.

[EasyEd]

President Obama has presided while at least 1.2 million innocent people have been executed yet you offer no comments on this subject except to offer an equivalency to the far, far fewer executed in Texas, an even fewer of which might possibly, possibly be innocent.

[hoyainspirit]

Sept 24, 2011 12:18:22 GMT -5 EasyEd said:

President Obama has presided while at least 1.2 million innocent people have been executed yet you offer no comments on this subject except to offer an equivalency to the far, far fewer executed in Texas, an even fewer of which might possibly, possibly be innocent.

What a straw man argument! Do you post this junk just to hear yourself talk?

[jerseyhoya34]

It is a shame of an argument. But, for the relativists on the board, those statistics would mean that Obama is more "pro-life" than Ronald Reagan (roughly 1.5 million/year).

[kchoya]

Sept 24, 2011 13:51:53 GMT -5 @jerseyhoya34 said:

It is a shame of an argument. But, for the relativists on the board, those statistics would mean that Obama is more "pro-life" than Ronald Reagan (roughly 1.5 million/year).

Yes, I'm sure most people would agree with you that Obama is more pro-life than Reagan.

[derhoya]

Can someone explain why Huntsman isn't getting more air time? He's been hanging around 1% or so on realclearpolitics' blended poll (combines all major ones basically). He makes sense and likes to cut through the BS questions tossed at him at these debates.

[TBird41]

Sept 24, 2011 14:52:02 GMT -5 derhoya said:

Can someone explain why Huntsman isn't getting more air time? He's been hanging around 1% or so on realclearpolitics' blended poll (combines all major ones basically). He makes sense and likes to cut through the BS questions tossed at him at these debates.

I think your second sentence answers your first

[SFHoya99]

TBird beat me to it.

[EasyEd]

Sept 24, 2011 13:51:53 GMT -5 @jerseyhoya34 said:

It is a shame of an argument. But, for the relativists on the board, those statistics would mean that Obama is more "pro-life" than Ronald Reagan (roughly 1.5 million/year).

Guess the lawyer didn't read the "at least" part. Had I said 1.5 million you would have pulled out statistics to show it was only 1.49 million.

And, of course, the only responses to my post were flippant responses instead of about its content.

[AustinHoya03]

Sept 24, 2011 11:49:09 GMT -5 @jerseyhoya34 said:

Sept 23, 2011 11:33:51 GMT -5 rosslynhoya said:

"All but established" is some kind of fancy lawyer talk that means the same thing as "not established" right? No wonder law school takes three years.

I'm glad that not all Republicans treat life and death issues with such flippancy. The Willingham case has been the subject of much media attention, including in a lengthy New Yorker piece (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann) and a Frontline documentary.

One key conclusion:
In 2005, Texas established a government commission to investigate allegations of error and misconduct by forensic scientists. The first cases that are being reviewed by the commission are those of Willingham and Willis. In mid-August, the noted fire scientist Craig Beyler, who was hired by the commission, completed his investigation. In a scathing report, he concluded that investigators in the Willingham case had no scientific basis for claiming that the fire was arson, ignored evidence that contradicted their theory, had no comprehension of flashover and fire dynamics, relied on discredited folklore, and failed to eliminate potential accidental or alternative causes of the fire. He said that Vasquez’s approach seemed to deny “rational reasoning” and was more “characteristic of mystics or psychics.” What’s more, Beyler determined that the investigation violated, as he put it to me, “not only the standards of today but even of the time period.” The commission is reviewing his findings, and plans to release its own report next year. Some legal scholars believe that the commission may narrowly assess the reliability of the scientific evidence. There is a chance, however, that Texas could become the first state to acknowledge officially that, since the advent of the modern judicial system, it had carried out the “execution of a legally and factually innocent person.”

* * * * *

Unfortunately, this kind of analysis was not performed in advance of trial, and, yes, Willingham can/should blame his lawyers (if he were alive). Interesting read for folks interested in science/forensics as well. As to the commission installed in 2005, the commissioners have been replaced by the Governor's Office, and a report of the new commission has not been forthcoming.

While it's sadly true that Rick Perry effectively quashed the post-execution investigation of the Willingham case, the incident has been embarrassing for the State of Texas due to many interested individuals playing politics, much of it AFTER the New Yorker article was released.

FWIW, the Commission's authority has seemingly been further restricted by a new Texas Attorney General opinion, which you might have pointed out:

www.texastribune.org/texas-dept-criminal-justice/cameron-todd-willingham/ag-issues-ruling-forensic-science-jurisdiction/

Beyler's conclusion that the initial Willingham investigation did not meet standards in place at the time of the offense has been widely contested. Additionally, your comment that "Unfortunately, this kind of analysis was not performed in advance of trial" is hopelessly out-of-touch. If you think that every arson investigation in the United States can and should be led by an internationally renowned and very expensive arson expert, you are living in fantasyland.

Cameron Todd Willingham's actual innocence will never be conclusively established, no matter how many times strident death penalty opponents claim it can be. Cameron Todd Willingham's actual guilt will never conclusively be established beyond all doubt. The American jury system does not require that the latter be established for a person to be convicted of capital murder and executed.

Rick Perry absolutely deserves to take shots for thwarting the Commission's investigation for political purposes. In my opinion, he does not deserve to take shots for failing to stop the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham, but that's been the tone of all the attacks from the left on this issue. In my opinion, these attacks exploit emotion and widespread public misconceptions regarding the American criminal justice system for a specific political gain. Not the "let's change the justice system" type of political gain, but the "let's say Rick Perry is a cold-blooded killer of men" type of political gain.

I'm no fan of Gov. Goodhair's, but he's not a demon on this issue. Just a sleazeball.

[jerseyhoya34]

Personally, I think Willingham's attorney could have done more to challenge the fireman's report as to the cause of the blaze and owed to to Willingham to have done more. I know full well you can't get a Beyler to show up for trial in Corsicana, Texas, and I know full well that effective assistance does not mean perfect assistance (particularly in hindsight), but the quality of the work (or lack thereof) has struck me as egregiously bad.

[Elvado]

Those stupid redneck Republicans are really racist aren't they? Maybe Republican antipathy toward Barry is competenct/ideology based, not race based.

[kchoya]

You'd think with all his practice, he'd be better at reading off his teleprompter.

latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-congressional-black-caucus-video-gaffe.html

[hoyainspirit]

Sept 25, 2011 10:49:34 GMT -5 Elvado said:

Those stupid redneck Republicans are really racist aren't they? Maybe Republican antipathy toward Barry is competenct/ideology based, not race based.

I'm sure for some Republicans, but for far too many people, race is a pivotal parameter, unfortunately.

[Elvado]

Did not hurt Herman Cain over the weekend.

[hoyawatcher]

Sept 26, 2011 11:10:29 GMT -5 hoyainspirit said:

Sept 25, 2011 10:49:34 GMT -5 Elvado said:

Those stupid redneck Republicans are really racist aren't they? Maybe Republican antipathy toward Barry is competenct/ideology based, not race based.

I'm sure for some Republicans, but for far too many people, race is a pivotal parameter, unfortunately.

Looked to me that Obama pulled the race card in a major way over the weekend. His speech to the CBC was the kind of speech I would expect Al Sharpton to give, not the president of all the United States. That kind of speech and approach to campaigning may well play to his base but will reinforce his perception of divisive politics and left wing leanings with the suburban swing voters who are the ones who voted him in as a post racial candidate.

Pubs have some folks who still live in the 50s with regard to relations but the Dems have their own folks with a Cracker or Hymetown view of life. Trying to paint with a broad brush on either one is not correct.

It is very rational to have a very negative view of the economic policies and results of this administration. For him to win reelection he has to have a lot broader coalition believing he represents them than just the CBC. This weekend he didn't do himself any favors with the suburban swing vote.