John Kasich Said Women Had to Leave Their Kitchens. Offensive? Not in Context.

Media seizes on another false dispatch from the GOP War on Women.

|

Kasich
Youtube

Hostilities have apparently resumed in the GOP War on Women: John Kasich told a group of people at a townhall in Virginia that women "left their kitchens to vote for him," according to the media.

The operative phrase being according to the media

It's easy to see why the quote would offend women and feed into the idea that all Republicans—even mild-mannered Kasich—are hopelessly sexist, which is probably why MashableJezebel and countless left-of-center journalists covered it. 

But Kasich's remark is much less outrageous when restored to its proper context. Here's what he said: 

How did I get elected? Nobody was—I didn't have anybody for me. We just got an army of people and many women who left their kitchens to go out and go door to door and put yard signs up for me. All the way back, when things were different. Now you call home and everybody's working. But at that time, early days, it was an army of the women that really helped me get elected to the state Senate. 

Kasich ran for state Senate in 1978. Yes, there were a lot of working women in 1978, but there were also a lot more housewives than there are today. It's good that social progress over the last 35 years has given women—and men—more choice over what they do with their lives. Kasich's comments don't actually suggest that he opposes said social progress, and they certainly don't suggest that modern women are just sitting at home with nothing better to do than distribute yard signs. 

In any case, there's plenty to dislike about John Kasich (hint: his presidency would be an "interventionist nightmare"). No need for the media to quote him out of context.

NEXT: Troops Withdrawing in Afghanistan—Afghan Troops

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I think we’re supposed to erase that history. Women have always been the captains of industry.

    1. Yet are simultaneously long suffering victims of TEH PATRIARCHY. Just like how libertarians are simultaneously a small, politically insignificant band of outsiders and malcontents, yet also secretly control everything through the KOCHTOPUS.

      1. Now you’re getting it!

      2. Sort of like the constant defensive groveling by whites to prove they aren’t racist, and how whites regularly lose their jobs and careers for saying one thing deemed racist, which proves how we live under Systemic Racism and White Oppression. That makes sense in the Progverse….

  2. “It’s easy to see why the quote would offend women and feed into the idea that all Republicans?even mild-mannered Kasich?are hopelessly sexist”

    “No need for the media to quote him out of context.”

    I think you just explained why there’s a need for the media to quote him out of context.

  3. Yep, this guy has VP doofus written all over him. He’s the Biden of the right.

    1. Do you have any reasons for thinking that? If so, why don’t you tell us what they are? Given that the post is about how reasonable his statement was when it is put in context, it is not immediately obvious just what the hell you are talking about.

      1. Ohio is a swing state. Its going to be Rubio-Kasich.

        Trump will run 3rd party.

        Hillary will win.

        Depressing enough to be true.

        1. (face flipper)

  4. If some broad came around to my door shilling for a politician I would find her man and tell him to keep her on a tighter leash!

    1. I bet they even went around $hilling barefoot.

    2. Spankings all around!

      1. And after that, the oral sex!

        1. I, I can handle a little peril!

          1. No. It’s unhealthy.

    3. Depends on what she’s willing to do to persuade you.

    4. I’d probably poll her.

      1. I really enjoy how this thread immediately went to innuendo and femsplainin’.

        /TIWTANLW

  5. ‘No need for the media to quote him out of context.’
    Why its a bad idea to spend all your character points on charismatic hair and none on intelligence.

    1. Yeah, I don’t think Robby quite understands that the media exists to run interference for Democratic candidates, especially places like Jezebel and Mashable.

      They aren’t trying to be honest and won’t be ashamed of their blatant lies and misrepresentations.

      1. Serious question, has there ever been a case where a mainstream outlet took something a Democrat said out of context such that it painted them in an unfair way? I am trying to think of one but am coming up blank.

        1. I believe they’ve tried to sell the “You didn’t build that” remark from Obama as “out of context”.

          Speaking for myself, if you read the whole thing in context, it really doesn’t materially change it.

          If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business ? you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

          1. Who in the mainstream media ever covered that from any perspective other than “those evil Republicans have gone and taken something Obama said out of context”?

            I don’t mean a case of the Republicans doing it. I mean a case of the media doing it.

            1. Without researching, my guess? Fox News. But to your point, I believe it’s vanishingly rare, and if you do a google search on “You didn’t build that” there are more mainstream media hits screaming that it was “taken out of context” than there are reporting it as a negative thing. So yeah, the MSM seems to be really doing yeoman’s work in making sure we understand what Obama really means.

              As sheer numbers, it happens to Republicans way more than it does Democrats.

              1. MSM are mostly Democratic operatives with bylines.

            2. I think they might have done it to Hillary back in 2008 when they were fawning over Obama, but I don’t recall any specifics.

          2. if you read the whole thing in context, it really doesn’t materially change it.

            If anything it’s even worse in context. He’s literally claiming that every successful person owes their success to the Glorious State. He’s basically just reformulating Mussolini’s famous quote:

            “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.”

        2. Do coverups count? I don’t think it was fair to paint Bobby Kennedy as the unfortunate victim of a car accident at Chappaquidick. Fair would have been to have him tried for involuntary manslaughter and have to go from the state pen to random high schools to tell his story to high school kids at the MADD assembly every yeat.

          1. For the record Bobby was the unfortunate victim of a Palestinian terrorists giving him a fatal case of lead poisoning.

            As for Teddy, I mean taking something out of context in a way that is harmful to a Democrat.

            1. Its a fair cop, guv!

        3. Howard Dean’s “YAAARGH” maybe? Supposedly it wasn’t as bad in context as when it was stand-alone.

          1. That is perhaps a good example. But, they did that to screw Dean so the media preferred John Kerry could get the nomination.

            1. Too lazy to google, plus I’ve got to go back to doing some actual work, but I wouldn’t be shocked if they’ve done this same thing to Bernie Sanders. Or if they haven’t, they will by the time all is said and done. Especially if it starts to look like he might actually win.

              1. Didn’t they make up a story about Sanders supporters in Nevada shouting “English Only” last weekend?

                1. Yeah, Hillary supporters claimed this happened but strangely there’s no audio of the incident and other people there said it never happened.

                2. That’s a great example, but not a direct hit on a politician.

          2. Oh, I forgot about “YAARGH.” It was no big deal at all, but that the media blew it completely out of proportion because they had decided Kerry was their guy.

        4. Not sure if this counts, John, but there’s a semi-conspiracy out there about the (Howard) “Dean scream” that claims it was really just audio manipulation designed to make him sound bad.

          1. That’s what I get for not reading the whole thread first….

            1. For all his YARRRGH-ing, how good would Dean (Howard, not our own RC—that answer’s obvious) look as the Dem candidate this year?

              I think I’d vote for him (or Webb, or Mark Warner: you get the idea) over Trump. Maybe over Rubio too?

              Christ, are the candidates mostly bad this time around.

    2. Look dude, there’s no need to get personal on Robby.

      1. Well, Robby, ok. But you leave his hair alone.

    3. Why its a bad idea to spend all your character points on charismatic hair and none on intelligence.

      Jealous much?

      1. See, that’s what a lack on intelligence does to your writing skills.

        1. And a lack of an edit button…

  6. Romney may had won in 2012 if he had let those women out of his binders.

    1. They aren’t called “trapper/keepers” for nothing you know.

      1. Isn’t that spelled “Trapher/ Keepher?

  7. Why is the idea of knowing how to cook offensive?

    1. Because McDonald’s serves breakfast all day now.

    2. Or a better question; is there anything that is not offensive?

        1. Also:

          “In Kopper’s Thursday morning message she said she’d held an open forum Tuesday evening where dozens of students attended and “shared with me some truly upsetting stories about their experiences on campus including the use of racial slurs and microaggressions.”

          Black students reported finding a racial slur written on their doors this semester, according to the Associated Press. Kopper promised more forums so that school administrators will continue to hear from students, and said that a working group is in place to search for solutions to address racism on campus. ”

          See, other racist things have happened therefore it was okay for me to claim these people were evil bigots even though they aren’t.

        2. The trick is to be the first one offended, then no one else can claim to be offended by you

          1. My 10-year old son deals with a bully at school. The bully had him saying a tongue twister that had him say ‘ass’. The bully then went to his teacher to has that my son had said ‘ass’ that the he was OFFENDED! So it appears that even low-life fourth grade crybullies have learned this lesson. Unfortunately for the crybully, the teacher does not subscribe to his idea of social justice.

            1. Yep. My kid has had other kids use the bullying paranoia to attempt to bully.

              Its amazing how manipulative kids are.

              1. Well, children are practically sociopaths so…

            2. Unfortunately for the crybully, the teacher does not subscribe to his idea of social justice.

              Wrong kind of teacher. If it was Prof. [teacher’s name], I’m pretty sure your kid would be off to mandatory sensitivity training.

        3. Her response to the backlash was the definition of doubling-down on stupid.

          “You…you should’ve KNOWN that certain exfoliating creams would create feelings of oppression and anxiety in this unjust world of white male dominance!” (paraphrasing)

      1. Not having useful skills? I guess feminists must revere the Kardashians.

        1. Damn, that’s good.

        2. They must loathe Bryan Mills.

          1. Not only does he have a “particular set of skills” but he used those skills to rescue his “helpless” teenaged daughter. It would have been better for her to get raped repeatedly by that fat Saudi sheik than be rescued by an (ugh) man.

            Also, those Albanians were an oppressed minority, and he tortured one of them. Punching down, much?! I mean, GAWD!11!!!! /DERP

            1. I love how punching down is a codification of the sort of grievance poker that they previously insisted didn’t exist. No, no! Nobody is competing to be the most victimiest of them all! But if you are, nobody is allowed to criticize you.

    3. It others those poor darlings who have to eat at Panera and pay quadruple for a coffee at Starbucks because they never learned how.

      1. poor darlings who have to eat at Panera

        I do pity those people. Panera has to be the dullest sandwich restaurant ever.

        1. I was just there today, using the gift card I received for Christmas. They are always packed! I do not understand.

          1. Someone gave you a Panera gift card for Christmas? Man.

            1. Do you think the kind of person who’d exchange Christmas gifts with Crusty WOULDN’T be giving out Panera gift cards?

              1. You make it seem like I give them gifts.

              2. Better than a Chipotle gift card….

              3. I mean, at least a Subway gift card…$6 footlongs for one more week!

                1. Like a former subway mascot, LD wants to get into some smaller pants.

          2. They have good danishes. Overpriced, but good. Never had anything else there except a decent breakfast sandwich.

        2. They have pretty good soup. But yes it’s overrated and it’s always full of old people (hence the soup) navigating the parking lot is usually like the grey dawn episode of south park

          1. Soup’s not a meal!

            1. But what about…stew?

        3. I used to eat the french onion soup there all the time. I went recently and it was no longer on the menu. The woman at the counter said they were “fixing” it by lowering the salt content. I asked, “So, it will be returning to the menu once the geniuses at corporate remove all of the flavor?” This was not found to be funny. I will not be back.

          1. I hate that. Soup just needs the right amount of salt or it doesn’t work.

    4. I don’t think that was the supposedly offensive part. It’s the implication (which in context really wasn’t there) that women are generally un-politically involved housewives. The idea that that should be offensive I would think is offensive to those who are un-politically involved housewives.

      1. Politically involved housewives are the worst. I remember reading in my local paper a few years ago about a housewife/activist whose single issue was school lunches “that’s why I got into politics” ridiculous

        1. And sometimes those people go on to higher offices than the school board. Yikes.

          1. Is FLOTUS considered a higher office?

        2. Go for lunch, stay for dinner.

  8. When did he stop beating his wife?

      1. Its like those portraits of Spaniah royalty where they all have the same face.

    1. That’s a trick question. …. He never STOPPED! /NYT’s editorial

      1. Harry Reid got up and said Mitt Romney was a tax cheat, with no evidence or reason to view it as anything other than a slander. Howard Dean, when he was chairman of the DNC, said that believing George Bush was aware of and let 911 occur for political benefit was “a serious position held by some people”. The Congressional Black Caucus lied and said tea party protesters called them a racial slur. Joe Biden said Mitt Romney intended to put blacks back into slavery.

        And yet, it is Donald Trump who has destroyed civility and reasoned political discourse in this country.

        1. Well, people were complaining about the lack of civility and reasoned political discourse long before Trump emerged as a plausible candidate. The difference with Trump is that he doesn’t bother to pretend that he is civil and engages in reasoned discourse.

          1. The difference with Trump is that he doesn’t bother to pretend that he is civil and engages in reasoned discourse.

            And strikes me as an improvement over pretending to be civil while saying vile and untrue things. If Trump were to have the effect of tearing off the PC veneer of our national discourse and forcing politicians to actually say what they meant rather than forever pretending to be one thing while implying something else, he will have done the country a great service.

            1. And strikes me as an improvement over pretending to be civil while saying vile and untrue things. If Trump were to have the effect of tearing off the PC veneer of our national discourse and forcing politicians to actually say what they meant rather than forever pretending to be one thing while implying something else, he will have done the country a great service.

              Definitely. The ones calling for more civil discourse are all too frequently the worst offenders, who just want the other guy to shut up and be polite. I’m hoping Trump’s legacy is that people follow his example of telling the PC morons to fuck off.

            2. I’m looking forward to the day when brawls break out in Congress here.

              1. I personally enjoy the clip of the Ukrainian parliament members trying to start a ruckus with Vitali Klitschko.

        2. Harry Reid is such a bastard. I remember after the whole thing about Romney being a tax cheat, a reporter asked him about it, and Reid replied, “Well, didn’t win the election,” or something like that.

          Fucking lowlife.

          1. Wasn’t a bit of the Senator Geary character in The Godfather Part 2 based on Reid? Or is this just another urban legend that should be true but isn’t?

            1. No. It was the State Senator in Casino that was based on Reid. I think Reid may have based himself on the character in Godfather 2.

  9. It’s good that social progress over the last 35 years has given women?and men?more choice over what they do with their lives.

    +1 Deacon Jones

  10. You guys are missing the joy that is the Trump campaign. No, I don’t mean the joy of thinking of the Donald actually being President. I mean the joy of watching the right wing media completely lose its fucking minds over his assent. The latest is some guy named Matt Walsh, who gives one of the most epic, smug and butt hurt rants I have read in a very long time.

    Remember, these are the same sorts of partisan hacks who would greet Chris Christie getting the nomination with at most some “well this is the best we can do” grumbling.

    Friend, I should tell you the most popular theory among non-Trump supporters is that you fall into the former category. When we talk to each other in private, almost everyone agrees you’re stupid. Again, you should, by your own words, hold me in the highest esteem for telling you this uncomfortable fact. People think you’re stupid, just as they thought about Barack Obama supporters in 2008.

    Because calling your readers stupid is absolutely the way to win people over to your side. I honestly think people like Walsh and the nerds over at the Weekly Standard and National Review thought their opinions mattered, that the did something besides collect a paycheck for talking out of their asses or that most voters knew who they were much less gave a shit what they think. Well Trump has come along to debase them of that noting. They don’t seem to be taking it well.

      1. Wait, someone who writes for “the Blaze” is incoherent and unhinged? Unpossible!

        1. Walsh is the same guy who wrote that Brittany Maynard should have had to die horribly rather than being allowed to commit suicide because Jesus says so.

          “If you are saying that it is dignified and brave for a cancer patient to kill themselves, what are you saying about cancer patients who don’t? What about a woman who fights to the end, survives for as long as she can, and withers away slowly, in agony, until her very last breath escapes her lungs?”

          Well, I’d say it’s brave to choose your own way in the face of unimaginable suffering and I’d argue that calling Brittany Maynard brave does not mean you think someone fighting cancer isn’t.

          Herp derp.

          1. My other theory on why the Right Wing media is going so insane over the prospect of Trump is that they actually love the culture war and are panicked at the thought of it ending. Trump is going to kill the culture war as an issue in the GOP. The guy is to the left on most culture war issues and doesn’t seem to consider any of those issues important.

            Walsh seems especially butt hurt that a lot of evangelicals are voting for Trump. Apparently they didn’t get the memo that they were required to be single issue culture war voters because Walsh says so.

            1. Trump is going to kill the culture war as an issue in the GOP.

              Yeah, abortion debates are over.

              1. I wouldn’t say they are over. But if the GOP were to nominate a guy who has praised planned parenthood, could you really call them important?

                I should not have said “ended”. Neither Trump nor anyone else is going to end the culture wars. I should have said “greatly reduce their importance at the national level” or something less clunky.

                Do you see what I mean?

                1. I see what you mean, but I do not think Trump’s presence changes the culture war shit in any way. They are here to stay, because that is how all modern day political issues are debated. Choose sides and have at it, party politics be damned.

                  1. Crusty,

                    If nothing else Trump is proving that few people outside of the media and activists really care much about the culture war. He is winning all kinds of SOCON voters who disagree with him about such issues.

                    1. Crusty,

                      If nothing else Trump is proving that few people outside of the media and activists really care much about the culture war. He is winning all kinds of SOCON voters who disagree with him about such issues.

                      I think Trump is separate from the culture wars. Trump is a fuck you to 16 years of Bush/Obama, and the Congresses that did nothing to stop them. That is it. The culture wars will sadly continue.

                    2. Trump is a fuck you to 16 years of Bush/Obama, and the Congresses that did nothing to stop them.

                      I think he is definitely that. And why everyone on this board is losing their minds over the nation saying fuck you to 16 years of Bush and Obama and the Congress that enabled them is still a mystery to me.

                      That does however say something about the culture wars, namely that most voters view telling the two parties to fuck off and get their acts together as more important than the culture wars. And that means the culture wars are a hell of a lot less important than the media would have us believe.

                    3. You could be right, but “guns” and “abortion” will continue to be exceedingly divisive no matter what.

                    4. And why everyone on this board is losing their minds over the nation saying fuck you to 16 years of Bush and Obama and the Congress that enabled them is still a mystery to me.

                      I don’t think that too many people are actually (or even figuratively) losing their minds. I think it is mostly people who think that Trump is an awful candidate and obnoxious person and say so. It’s a bit satisfying to see the “fuck you” to 16 years of Bush and Obama. But the deeper content (to the extent that there is any) isn’t terribly encouraging to libertarians. Rejecting the party establishments is great. But there are plenty of worse things that could replace them. It also ruins the fantasy of some that lots of Republicans are really libertarians deep down.

                    5. He is winning all kinds of SOCON voters who disagree with him about such issues.

                      I think that is because the racist, xenophobe parts of their brains overrule the gay rights/ abortion parts.

                    6. I think that is because the racist, xenophobe parts of their brains overrule the gay rights/ abortion parts.

                      I believe you have fulfilled your virtue and social signalling requirement for the day. Let it be said, you are one of the enlightened, educated and tolderant ones and not one of THOSE PEOPLE.

            2. Or maybe right-wingers are not happy with the prospect of having to choose between a left-wing candidate and Hillary/Sanders.

              1. They seemed pretty happy about choosing between McCain and Obama. And I don’t see how Trump is any more left wing than McCain. And they wouldn’t be losing their shit if Christie were winning. And Trump is to the right of Christie or at worst about the same.

                1. Considering that Trump will say or do anything that he thinks will get him votes, trying to ascertain his right or left-wingedness is pretty hard to do. He’s a fucking loudmouthed windmill.

                  It’s like trying to judge how left-wing Obama would be based on the pack of lies he told to get elected the first time as POTUS.

                  If I had to rank the frontrunners in each party from worst to the least bad, I’d get:

                  1) Trump

                  2) Sanders

                  3) Clinton

                  4) Rubio

                  5) Cruz

                  6) Gary Johnson

                  7) None of the Above (not currently on the ballot)

                  1. How in the world could you put Trump, a guy you admit has no ideology, as worse than Sanders, a committed socialist? Even if what you say about Trump is true, that just means he is just as likely to do the right thing as he is the wrong thing or that it is at least possible that he might do the right thing if it is politically beneficial. Sanders makes no secret about his absolutely commitment to always do the wrong thing. And Hillary is an arch criminal wth a 30 year history of always doing the wrong thing.

                    1. Trump is worse because the Republicans hold the house and senate and would allow all sorts of batshit insane things to get through because of partisan politics. At least if Sanders gets elected, the “gridlock” can continue or if we are really lucky intensify.

                    2. Trump is worse because the Republicans hold the house and senate and would allow all sorts of batshit insane things to get through because of partisan politics.

                      And they would never sell out and fold to Bernie. It is not like they haven’t done that for six years under Obama. I mean the House stopped Obama in his tracks in 2011, right?

                      And Bernie would never do any damage with the huge amount of executive authority Obama is leaving him/. And I am sure the media would not go easy on Bernie like they have on Obama. No. They would call it fair.

                      HAve you lost your mind Zunalter?

                    3. Considering I live in a world where Trump is the GOP frontrunner, I feel like I may have.

                      Also, your assumption that Mr. Trump would be above all of those similar abuses is laughable. Considering all of the crony capitalism and bad politics he freely admits engaging in, if you think he is going to use the power of the presidency honorably, you are batshit insane as well. At least we expect it with Sanders.

                  2. Hillary would be the worst. She’s a dangerous mix of vindictive, narcissistic, and incompetent.

                2. Immigration, trade, and globalization.

                  I’m for all of those, but its been pretty fast and deep.

                  I’ve been to factories in China that are less than 5 years old and they are thinking of moving to Vietnam….what kind of life can people have when they have to move to another country 5 years after opening a factory?

                  I purposely chose a China example, because this stuff has hit Asia, too.

                  Here in the USA, they get it from the trade side to the immigration side, as well as even the customer service side. This gets people very anxious.

                  Thus, Trump’s attraction to large segments of the population.

                  Trade and globalization in particular hit middle income people the hardest as its those jobs that can be most profitably be outsourced now.

                  Me, personally, I think another 10-30 years and things will calm down as wages increase in Asia and stay flat here, until finally the world has roughly equivalent pay. But that will not be an enjoyable process, except for the Asians, mainly. Even then, they get horrible pollution and outsourcing, too, eventually.

                  1. Harun,

                    I agree with you about trade and the long term outlook. At the same time, I think the fears Trump would start a trade war are way overblown. The reality is the Chinese are protecting their industries while having access to our markets. I understand that is not as bad as people think. But, if a “trade war” is so horrible as people claim, why then would the Chinese want one such that they would immediately start one instead of working out a deal when Trump threatened to respond?

            3. Didn’t you say earlier today that immigration is a culture war issue?

              1. MJ Green,

                In a sense yes. But it is one by analogy, meaning people have gotten so emotional about it that it is effectively being treated as if it is one.

                Here, I meant culture war in the traditional sense. But now that you mention it, Trump is in some ways a change in the culture war in that his popularity is about rejecting the culture of Washington and the media, of which a commitment to open borders is a huge part.

        2. I don’t read it that often. Is it that bad? This article came up on a facebook feed. I follow James Toranto on facebook. I like Toranto a lot. His other fans, however, have completely lost their minds over Trump. Compared to those people, Reason is giving fair, thoughtful and unbiased opinions on Trump.

          I understand why reason and places on the left are losing their minds over Trump. But I honestly can’t understand why so many Republicans are going even more insane. In 2008, the GOP nominated John McCain. You know McCain, one of the most petty and uncivil assholes in Washington and the guy who gave the country McCain Feigngold. And none of these people who are now near suicidal over the prospect of the GOP nominating someone who is mean and not a conservative seemed to have a problem with it.

          What is it about Trump that causes partisan hacks to lose their minds?

          1. What is it about Trump that causes partisan hacks to lose their minds?

            Loss of control (or of the illusion of control), I’d say. Trump doesn’t give a shit about the party or the conservative media elite and that threatens the illusion that they are important and influential.

            1. Loss of control (or of the illusion of control), I’d say. Trump doesn’t give a shit about the party or the conservative media elite and that threatens the illusion that they are important and influential.

              This. I would add that he also shattered their illusions that the rank-and-file are an army of principled conservatives.

          2. What is it about Trump that causes partisan hacks to lose their minds?

            because he’s not one of them. He’s not a partisan; he is a guy who has openly talked about paying to play because that’s how the system works. He’s not a career wonk, bogged down in the minutae that only the DC class really cares about. And he’s a middle finger to the establishment. Good theater, all in all, but these folks are humorless.

          3. What is it about Trump that causes partisan hacks to lose their minds?

            Could it be that the rank and file are finally seeing this cliff we are going over and realize that a guy like Trump would hit the accelerator?

            8 years ago I voted for McCain, today I wouldn’t even consider it.

            1. Could it be that the rank and file are finally seeing this cliff we are going over and realize that a guy like Trump would hit the accelerator?

              And Christie, Kaisch, Jeb and likely Rubio wouldn’t as well? At least by your standards? They don’t seem too panicked over those guys winning.

              Sorry, but the whole “But Trump is worse” claim is just not true.

              1. Will Trump get rid of Obamacare?

                No.

                Will Trump “bring American jobs back?”

                Doubtful.

                At best, he builds a wall and toughens immigration.

                OK, but I don’t feel that is worth keeping socialized medicine.

                Thus, I support Ted Cruz.

                I also think Trump, right now, is as conservative/small government as he gets. Once its the general election, he runs to the left.

                Then once elected he’ll make deals that look exactly like Boehners’.

                Maybe he will take a stab at the VA. I wish him luck. He will find its not the private sector and that change is harder.

                1. Harum,

                  I support Cruz over Trump as well. My point is that I don’t see how Trump is any worse than many of the other GOP candidates.

              2. And Christie, Kaisch, Jeb and likely Rubio wouldn’t as well?

                Fair point, I think they would as well.

                I think what drives people (at least me) insane is that while we historically expect that all politicians are smarmy to some extent, there is a huge cult of personality about Trump where large swaths of people think he is a saint, despite being the smarmiest of all. As Trump himself said, he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose a single voter.

                He’s like the white, republican Obama. Except Obama was mainly interested in screwing over the portion of the electorate that didn’t vote for him. Trump is going to screw over the selfsame people who put him in office and do it in a big way.

    1. What’s wrong with calling Trump supporters dumb? You call progressives dumb all the time. By your logic, this is bad because you won’t ever win them to your side.

      Some people are stupid or are behaving stupidly and at a certain point they deserve to be insulted.

      1. Nothing necessarily. The problem is that he just calls them dumb and makes no attempt to understand why they are doing what they are doing. His and really the entire right wing media argument against Trump is that Trump is not a conservative and is really crude and uncivil.

        Those would be fine arguments except that the GOP hasn’t nominated a conservative for President since Reagan and Republican voters have spent their entire lives watching the Democrats say the most vile and untrue things about them and any Republican candidate who stood up to them. Yet, people like Walsh think those things should matter.

        And for the record, Trump supporters are not stupid. In fact, they are a lot smarter than people like Walsh for the simple reason they are smart enough to realize both parties are responsible for the mess we are and no politician is going to tell the truth or follow through on his work.

        Trump supporters are only stupid if you assume that any of these ass clowns mean what they say or things would get better if we would only give the Republicans one more election victory. The people on here of all people should understand how stupid thinking that is.

        The possibility of Trump selling out the Democrats is only an issue if you think the Republicans won’t. And no one outside of these hacks really believes that.

        1. And for the record, Trump supporters are not stupid

          Citation needed.

          In fact, they are a lot smarter than people like Walsh for the simple reason they are smart enough to realize both parties are responsible for the mess we are and no politician is going to tell the truth or follow through on his work.

          Perfect reason why one should never vote.

          1. Stupid is a relative term Los Doyers. Compared to people like Walsh who think paradise is always just one more Republican victory away, they most certainly are not stupid.

          2. Trump supporters are highly emotional and don’t handle criticism of the Trumpen Fuhrer particularly well.

            They might not be stupid in their general lives, but it’s possible to be competent at your job and a total idiot politically. Trump fans are no more rational about politics than the average raving progressive SJW is.

            1. that first line makes them sound like Obama-bots. And that’s going so well.

              1. Trump supporters also have their own brand of political correctness related to criticizing Trump supporters or the man himself.

                Walsh’s point here is 100% accurate. Trump supporters don’t really want people who tell it like it is because if you tell it like it is about their little group, they throw hissy fits. The whole thing is about claiming to hate political correctness while instituting your own version of it, which is Walsh’s entire point.

                1. just saying they often sound like Camp Obama in not taking criticism well. Which I am sure would set the Trumpkins off.

        2. they are a lot smarter than people like Walsh for the simple reason they are smart enough to realize both parties are responsible for the mess we are and no politician is going to tell the truth or follow through on his work

          I’m not sure how smart you have to be to figure that out.

          Of course, Trump supporters are not all stupid. Of the handful of Trump supporters I know at all well, I don’t think I’d call any of them stupid. Some of them are assholes, but definitely not stupid.

          1. Note: Walsh also thinks the Republican party sucks, so he also agrees the parties are responsible and merely disagrees that Trump is the solution.

            So no, they aren’t smarter than Walsh for noticing that, since Walsh also notices that.

          2. Serious question Irish and Zeb and anyone else reading this.

            Do either of you actually know any Trump supporters and if so how many do you know?

            I know around ten of them. A small sample for sure but more than none or one. And all of them are completely different than how they are described on this board.

            What is your experience?

            1. the only common denominator among the ones I know is being pissed at the system. Some on the left make that claim, too, but they then turn to the ultimate cronyist insider. The Trump folks seem to believe that he can’t do worse than the professional class.

            2. I am related to several. None of them can articulate a rational, objective reason for supporting Trump. They all descend quickly into talking points and non sequiturs. They’re actually extremely similar to Obama supporters.

              1. My experience is closer to wareagles. And of the ten Trump supporters I know, six of them were Ron Paul guys in 2012. The common denominators among are:

                1. A deep concern over the country going broke,
                2. A belief that the failure to secure the border is hurting the country and may in fact get a bunch of people killed
                3. A complete mistrust and dislike of politicians
                4. A loathing of PC and Washington Culture
                5. Are completely disgusted with fighting wars in the name of other people’s freedom.(Trump did himself a huge amount of good calling out Bush on the Iraq war. A lot of Republicans agreed with him)

                All of them support Trump pretty much for similar reasons why non-Libertarians supported Paul in 2012, a belief that something radical has to be done and can only be done by someone not connected to Washington.

                They may be wrong in their support of Trump. I would not call any of the stupid or irrational, however.

            3. This describes a lot of Trump supporters: (??????? ???

              But not all of them. Brett Easton Ellis was at a West Hollywood dinner party last week, and was shocked at how many people were going to vote for Trump, but would never admit it in public. I am seeing similar things on anonymous social media: some gay hairdresser in San Jose who says his buddies are Trump fans. People reporting that two-time Obama voters plan to vote for Trump. It’s fascinating.

              What Reason and libertarians should do is figure out how to sell to Trump specific libertarian solutions to specific problems. He’s a problem solver guy, not an ideologue. So if libertarian solutions solve a problem, he should be OK with that. Go with the flow, folks.

            4. I know two trump supporters.

              They have told me they like him because he pisses the right people off. Full stop.

              They are also both Catholics who vote solely on who will do the most to limit abortion.

              I think they know that the establishment treats the pro-lifers as a safe constituency they need not worry will defect to the opposing party.

              1. Oh and they both have STEM degrees and one works at NASA designing guidance systems for space probes.

                If I judged them based on their political pronouncements, they are drooling simpletons. But I know them to be quite intelligent in other areas of their lives. And the are good friends of mine.

                1. “If I judged them based on their political pronouncements, they are drooling simpletons. But I know them to be quite intelligent in other areas of their lives. And the are good friends of mine.”

                  Yes, there is a difference between political intelligence and practical intelligence.

                  People are insulated enough from the immediate consequences of bad political decisions that many people who are otherwise intelligent become immensely stupid on the subject of politics.

                2. If I judged them based on their political pronouncements, they are drooling simpletons. But I know them to be quite intelligent in other areas of their lives. And the are good friends of mine.

                  Expertise is as much about attention as intelligence. People who only really pay attention to politics and governance every couple of years tend to think it doesn’t matter as mich who is in charge. I’m not sure they’re always wrong, but I think this might be a case. On the other hand, I don’t believe Trump would be more petty, venal, and horrible than Clinton. He might wven grow into the office. It really depends on how much he is playing the Cad and how much he is campaigning how he would govern. But I don’t think Trump aupporters are stupid. They want to kick the GOP in the nuts for once instead of taking the nutshot. That’s not crazy, its very human.

              2. They are also both Catholics who vote solely on who will do the most to limit abortion.

                Did you forget to say “who are supposed to vote..” Apparently they don’t or they would not be Trump supporters.

                1. Apparently they don’t or they would not be Trump supporters.

                  It *is* a big change from their past voting style. I guess they got tired of the GOP bait and switch on abortion and decided to burn the place down. And it’s all emotion, as best I can tell.

            5. “Do either of you actually know any Trump supporters and if so how many do you know?”

              My cousin who is a very nice guy but a political moron and has no explanation for why Trump is a good candidate.

              (Incidentally, my cousin is the son of an illegal Mexican immigrant so I’m not sure how he came to support Trump)

              I’ve also had plenty of arguments with Trump supporters and I have yet to hear an explanation for why he would be a good president other than “HE FIGHTS” and “HE’S NOT PC”

              1. Incidentally, my cousin is the son of an illegal Mexican immigrant so I’m not sure how he came to support Trump

                I have known a lot of Mexicans who do not support amnesty. This is especially true of ones who busted their ass an managed to come here legally. The ones who did that often have little sympathy for people who just walked across the border.

            6. I ran into a physician in the grocery store the other night. I used to work with the guy and assure you he is certifiably insane. He once told me that he couldn’t sleep at night because of all the noise that the turkeys make when they are in the pond near his house. He also claimed that men would come at night and run around on the roof of his house.

              After we said our hellos he immediately launched into a spittle flecked rant in favor of Trump.

              Yeah, I know a Trump supporter.

            7. As I said in my comment, I know a few (4 or 5) and none of them are people I would call stupid. One is a very successful entrepreneur/businessman and the rest are pretty regular, older men.

              It’s hard to say if this says anything about Trump supporters in general or if it says more about the people I know.

              All candidates get a lot of support from idiots, or for stupid reasons from mostly uninterested people. I doubt that Trump is significantly more or less dependent on the the support of the stupid than anyone else.

              1. I doubt that Trump is significantly more or less dependent on the the support of the stupid than anyone else.

                I agree Zeb. and I also think Brett L’s statement above about people not paying attention is true as well.

                I know a lot of Sanders supporters too. And with the exception of one friend’s college age son who seems to be completely ignorant and insane, while they are wrong, they are not stupid and have rational reasons for supporting him. They do at least understand how badly Wall Street and Washington are fucking this country even though they are woefully misguided in how to fix such.

              2. I would add that these are not people who I discuss politics with. So I have no idea what their reasons are for supporting Trump or how stupid they would sound to me.

            8. I know a handful. My old man largely fits into items 1 – 4 on your list with a lot of emphasis on 3 and 4. A buddy of mine actually said he was tired of the major parties, considers himself a “libertarian” and is supporting Trump because he’ll “tell it like it is” and is very concerned about your item 2. When I tried to offer up example after example of how Trump is (or has been) on the wrong side of some very red meat issues for both of them (2nd Amendment, unfettered abortion, government-run healthcare, higher taxes, lack of concern about personal property rights, etc.) they just shut down. It is 100% about feelings with them. And that IS very Obamabot.

    2. To be fair, I have yet to talk to a Trump supporter who wasn’t stupid.

      1. Have you yet to talk to a supporter of any candidate that you didn’t think was stupid?

  11. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.Paybucket40.com

  12. Slightly OT: Al Jazeera ‘Murrica, just days before going down the drain, publishes a big ‘FU’ to the journalism world.
    “Ya all fuckin’ tools and shills.”
    http://america.aljazeera.com/o…..mises.html
    Always go out cursing.

  13. Ha, the Jezebel update on their story:

    Update, 12:45 p.m.:

    The full verbatim quote from the rally shows that Kasich was either talking about his race to the state Senate in 1978, or winning a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1982. We assure you women were working outside of the kitchen in both those years.

    1. We assure you women were working outside of the kitchen in both those years. And that means some were not?

      I guess logic is patriarchal or something.

      1. Logic doesn’t enter into it. He is reporting a historical fact from his early campaigns. Logical or not, his campaign relied on large numbers of housewives taking to the streets on his behalf. Perhaps Jezzies would rather that he had relied upon working women taking leaves of absence to campaign on his behalf, but that didn’t happen. So here we are.

        1. What? Are you saying actual things that happened shouldn’t be sent down the memory hole because modern leftists want to pretend they never occurred?

        2. you’re asking Jezzies to think rather than emote. Dude.

      2. What I don’t get is that this doesn’t violate any feminist narrative. They should be trumpeting the fact that more women are working outside the home than when Kasich first ran for office.

        1. It’s just the usual bullshit. Use anything you can get hold of to beat on your opponent. Must maintain the narrative that conservatives are motivated primarily by racism and misogyny.

        2. Of course it violates the feminist narrative. They can’t admit that they got 90%+ of what they wanted. Same as the civil rights movement: to admit that racism/sexism/homophobia have greatly lessened is to say that activism is less necessary today. Can’t have that!

          1. It also violates the feminist narrative of “Republicans are evil, democrats are great!”

            So when Bob Packwood was accused of harassment by female staffers (including the temerity of having a secretary type his personal diary, including sexual conquests!) – he’s evil and has to go!

            But at the same time, the same people vigorously defended Bill Clinton against accusations of rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment. Even after the famous dress put the lie to everything they’d been told, they had both feet in the “it is just a private matter” camp.

            Team Red vs. Team Blue is the only narrative that matters. “Men are evil and must be subjugated at every turn” is a distant second.

    2. I’m sure a Millennial Jezebel writer has a better grasp of what women were doing in 1982 then the man whose campaign organized them to put up political signs.

      It’s not like Kasich was there or anything and has actual memories of how they organized the campaign.

    3. We assure you women were working outside of the kitchen in both those years.

      This changes everything. Thank you for assuring me, Jezebel.

    4. “We assure you women were working outside of the kitchen in both those years.” Putting up signs in yards.

      We assure you women were cooking inside of the kitchen both those years. The library dramatically turned out to lack pans.

    5. I’m convinced that in ten years when the current crop of college kids are deciding our curriculum, we are just going to stop talking about any history before 2008, except perhaps a preamble on how every problem in America is because President he-who-shall-not-be-name was elected President in 1980 and the Galactic Emperor stole an election in 2000 at the bidding of Darth Vader.

  14. I guess they were tired of waiting for a RETHUGLIKKKAN to make an actual sexist remark, so they decided to invent one.

  15. “John Kasich Said Women Had to Leave Their Kitchens. Offensive? Not in Context.”

    Oh, so now Reason gets to dictate what context offensiveness can take place in?

    Just change your name to “Patriarchy” already.

  16. According to BLS figures, in 1978, 50.0% of civilian, non-institutional women were in the labor force, (7.2% of those were unemployed).

    The percentage of women in the labor force peaked in 1999, and has been trending downward ever since.

    See: US Bureau of Labor Statistics (2015). Women In The Labor Force: A Databook. US Department of Labor, Washington, DC.

    Safe, Legal, and In The Kitchen.

    1. * The actual percentage in 1978 was actually a few hundredths of a percent below 50%.

    2. I checked that link but did not find the figures on what percentage of women who campaigned for Kasich in 1978 were employed. Can you post a link to that cite?

  17. Why bother with the exegesis of politicians’ soundbites?

  18. “In any case, there’s plenty to dislike about John Kasich (hint: his presidency would be an “interventionist nightmare”). No need for the media to quote him out of context.”

    As my grandfather used to say “They would lie if the truth served them better”, i.e. the left is incapable of honesty.

    1. There is a need if you do not believe an interventionist president is intrinsically nightmarish.

  19. YOU ALL LEAVE POOR KASICH ALONE!!

    1. If it’s a legitimate kitchen, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole candidacy down.

  20. O.T.: I was just thinking about how progs have been so sickeningly adamant about calling Obama President Obama when referring to him, as if people would have no idea who they were talking about if they just called him by his last name without the title. I don’t recall very many people applying the same treatment to Bush. Bush was just Bush even though that could refer to any number of people. I wonder how Trump will be addressed if he gets elected.

    1. There was a big uproar about this a few years back, actually. One of the MSNBC tards alleged that the reason you hear so many people on the right refer to Barry as simply “Obama” and not “President Obama” is because they are racists who refuse to accept that a black man is president and that was their way of undermining his legitimacy.

      In response, someone on the web put together a couple montages of MSNBC pundits referring to GWB as “Bush” and to Barry as “Obama.” The manufactured outrage, to my knowledge, disappeared after that.

      1. Memory hole first, then increase the chocolate ration.

      2. I have friends who are otherwise reasonable people who are adamant in their belief that Republicans have treated Obama much worse than Democrats treated Bush. And no amount of point to the endless list of appalling behavior on the part of Democrats towards Bush will convince them otherwise.

        I think what is going on is that they invested so much of their personal self esteem in Obama being a great President that it is impossible for them to admit he wasn’t. Since anyone other than the real closet case retards can deny things have gone badly, they fall back to the position that Obama was sabotaged by racist Republicans. And there can be no retreat from that position.

        1. Well, for so long, Republicans were content to play nice while the Democrats were in charge, despite the Democrats resorting to appalling tactics to obstruct or get their way. Now that the Republicans are finally engaged in a bit of turnabout (not much, mind you, as many of the old school bend-over-and-take-it crowd are still in office), the Democrats are crying “foul.”

          1. I can’t understand the amount of denial you have to be in to think there is something unfair or out of the ordinary about the Republicans refusing to confirm Obama’s replacement for Scalia. I mean Harry Reid would have totally confirmed a Bush appointee in 2008. Right?

            1. Elections have consequences!!

            2. I mean, you don’t even have to speculate. They’re all on record

    1. What happened? I think I blacked out from Schadenfreude overdose.

    2. Social justice is a term leftists have been using forever. They are all for it. It is the perfect buzzword for ‘doing whatever, killing whomever, I feel like’. Their playbook, in a nutshell, is to wreck the existing system and then install themselves in power during the ensuing chaos. Blood soaked chaos is the legacy of the left.

      1. All totalitarian systems are based on “social justice”. The French Terror, The Soviets, Mao, Nazis, the Khmer Rouge. That level of killing can only take place by telling the many that you are doing justice in their name by killing these others.

    3. Massive brutality apparently requires two things:

      An unwavering conviction in your methods and an education in France.

  21. This will help

    http://nbc4i.com/2016/02/21/ka…..hood-bill/

  22. The idea that TEH WOMYNZ would vote for a TEATHUGLIKKAN???? #ugh I can’t even. I mean, it’s 2016. Come. On.

  23. Start making more money weekly.This is a valuable part time work for everyone.The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from ?100-?2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details///

    http://www.workprospects.com

  24. I didn’t have anybody for me. We just got an army of people and many women who left their kitchens to go out and go door to door and put yard signs up for me. All the way back, when things were different. Now you call home and everybody’s working.But at that time, early days, it was an army of the women that really helped me get elected to the state Senate.

    Damn, and here I thought I might be able to use this strategy to support my own grassroots campaign by getting volunteers who weren’t employed. Cases where people are actively engaged with the welfare of their communities – community activists or welfare cases, if you will – people with the free time necessary to do nothing but make a colorable case for my candidacy.

  25. // It’s good that social progress over the last 35 years has given women?and men?more choice over what they do with their lives

    Yeah. Cause that’s what happened…

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.