Ben Carson Running for President

[Astronuc]

Ben Carson seems to be rising in the polls, and he seems to be running on the issues. I hope he stays on the issues and doesn't resort to negative campaigning against the others running for president.

Ben Carson on the issues: Inside the mind of the retired neurosurgeon surging in polls, rivaling Trump
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/ben-carson-on-the-issues-inside-the-mind-of-the-128202264151.html

Chris Cillizza, Washington Post, September 2 - Ben Carson ‘is the smartest man I have ever met’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-carson-is-the-smartest-man-i-have-ever-met/

I've heard some interviews, and he sounded thoughtful, which is a pleasant relief from a lot of the nonsense I've heard from some folks.

 

[Jeff Rosenbury]

We have a tradition in this country of electing the dumbest man for president, not the smartest. This doesn't bode well for his campaign -- or for us come to think of it.

 

[mheslep]

In a head to head poll Carson crushes Trump 55 to 36%.

 

[mheslep]

We have a tradition in this country of electing the dumbest man for president, ...

Nixon and Clinton are routinely described as brilliant by biographers and other first hand observers, far smarter than their opposition.

 

[Jeff Rosenbury]

Nixon and Clinton are routinely described as brilliant by biographers and other first hand observers, far smarter than their opposition.

Bush, Obama, Reagan.

Yes we occasionally elect a smart man, but it's not a qualification as far as I can tell. Nor do smarter men always do a significantly better job. Nixon had to resign and Reagan was near the top of the list -- with dementia.

Being president is far more about people skills than IQ.

 

[Hornbein]

Chris Cillizza, Washington Post, September 2 - Ben Carson ‘is the smartest man I have ever met’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-carson-is-the-smartest-man-i-have-ever-met/

Chris Cilizza is Carson's campaign manager. Sheesh.

 

[Astronuc]

Chris Cilizza is Carson's campaign manager. Sheesh.

What's the source of that claim?

According to a Wikipedia article (to be subject to vigorous verification, but it seems various newspapers report Bennet as campaign manager), Barry Bennet is the campaign manager. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Carson_presidential_campaign,_2016

Nevertheless, when a headline of a paper or blog uses a superlative in the qualification of a person, then one should be skeptical of such a claim. I take superlatives as an indication of a subjective statement.

 

[DavidSnider]

I could never vote for a Young Earth Creationist. That shows a serious disconnect from reality. If one of your axioms is that the Earth is about 6000 years old... that can't lead to good policy.

 

[Jeff Rosenbury]

I could never vote for a Young Earth Creationist. That shows a serious disconnect from reality. If one of your axioms is that the Earth is about 6000 years old... that can't lead to good policy.

Or a lack of study in scientific fields.

While Young Earthers will likely set poor science policy, so will other non-scientists. Politics is a separate area of expertise and there's rarely much overlap with the "real world".

Getting people to work together is like herding cats. It requires crazy skills. I suspect the ability to hold many contrary opinions is one of them.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I could never vote for a Young Earth Creationist. That shows a serious disconnect from reality. If one of your axioms is that the Earth is about 6000 years old... that can't lead to good policy.

These sound bytes are pretty alarming
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ben-carson-evolution-absurd-myth-give-me-break

He's supposed to be a neuroscientist!?

 

[Astronuc]

Carson is a Seventh Day Adventist and apparently rejects evolution, which could be problematic for some. It certainly would be a concern about his views on scientific policy questions.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...cement-speech/2012/05/08/gIQAi0vsBU_blog.html

Of particular concern

What is most deeply concerning about Dr. Carson’s dismissal of evolution is that he equates the acceptance of evolution with a lack of ethics and morality. In an interview published on the Adventist Review website he states, “Ultimately, if you accept the evolutionary theory, you dismiss ethics, you don’t have to abide by a set of moral codes, you determine your own conscience based on your own desires.”

On the other hand, I appreciate the fact that he doesn't speak disparagingly about the other candidates, at least from what I've heard so far. He seems to have a positive message.

 

[Bystander]

Young Earth Creationist. That shows a serious disconnect from reality.

Or a lack of study in scientific fields.

These sound bytes are pretty alarming

a concern about his views on scientific policy questions.

https://www.physicsforums.com/search/1871819/?q=science+policy&o=relevance&c[title_only]=1
There're four threads come up searching for titles containing "science policy" (all flops),
https://www.physicsforums.com/search/1871883/?q=scientific+policy
and 186 containing "scientific policy" (very few of which, first three pages, appear to be at all relevant to the search terms); do we really want to wander down that dead end again? Or, can we discuss Carson as a candidate?

 

[Hornbein]

What's the source of that claim?

According to a Wikipedia article (to be subject to vigorous verification, but it seems various newspapers report Bennet as campaign manager), Barry Bennet is the campaign manager. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Carson_presidential_campaign,_2016

Nevertheless, when a headline of a paper or blog uses a superlative in the qualification of a person, then one should be skeptical of such a claim. I take superlatives as an indication of a subjective statement.

According to the article you gave as a link, the words "DBC is the smartest man I have ever met" were uttered by Ben's campaign manager, Barry Bennet. Chris Cilliza was the reporter.

 

[Evo]

There's more to worry about Carson other than his anti-science beliefs.

The question is whether the right-wing neurosurgeon can parlay his status as a cause celebre into a top-tier presidential candidacy. There’s ample reason for skepticism GQ.recently profiled the Republican doctor under the headline, “What If Sarah Palin Were a Brain Surgeon?” In the piece, Carson was asked to name his favorite secretary of the treasury. He eventually replied, “Andrea Mitchell’s husband.”

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, of course, is married to Alan Greenspan – the former chairman of the Federal Reserve, who has never been the Treasury secretary.

The same piece noted Carson’s trip to Israel, where he seemed surprised to discover that Israel has a legislative branch.
The article was published around the time Carson did another interview in which he seemed confused about NATO and suggested violence among Islamic radicals dates back several centuries before Islam even existed.
At the time, he denounced the importance of “little details.”

What’s more, interest in Carson as a credible national candidate began to fade a bit when he shared some rather crackpot views on social policy. Two years ago Carson compared gay people to “NAMBLA [and] people who believe in bestiality.” After initially flubbing an apology and blaming critics for quoting him accurately, the Republican personality eventually walked back his comments. Carson’s reputation hasn’t been the same since.

Carson certainly hasn’t done much to bolster his own reputation, equating modern American life with Nazi Germany. He’s said health care reform is the worst thing to happen in the United States since slavery. During the crisis in Ferguson, Missouri, Carson said political correctness contributed to Michael Brown’s death, blamed “the women’s lib movement” for violence in the streets, and said those who protested the Ferguson shooting reminded him of Hamas.

Soon after, reflecting on the controversies surrounding his over-the-top language, Carson http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/ben-carson-to-the-gop-establishment-i-m-not-crazy-20150115 Republican National Committee members, “I stand by those” remarks, adding. “I don’t think there’s anything crazy at all.”

continued...

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/right-wing-neurosurgeon-ben-carson-enters-2016-race

 

[Astronuc]

On the other hand, I appreciate the fact that he doesn't speak disparagingly about the other candidates, at least from what I've heard so far. He seems to have a positive message.

OK - let me rephrase. While I appreciate the fact that he doesn't speak disparagingly about the other candidates, I don't appreciate his over-the-top or out-there comments. How on Earth does he tie the "womens' liberation" movement or 'feminisim' to 'lack of respect for authority', 'the me generation', out-of-wedlock births and violence in various communities?

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...nt-created-me-generation-helped-lead-ferguson

Unfortunately, he demonstrates a lack of critical thinking. He should be correcting the hosts who are interviewing him. Oh, well.

 

[mheslep]

"Stop The Right Wing!", gimme money, says that banner block add on that Carson web reference. Should I contribute before collecting dubious facts from the journalists at Right Wing Watch?

 

[Evo]

"Stop The Right Wing!", gimme money, says that banner block add on that Carson web reference. Should I contribute before collecting dubious facts from the journalists at Right Wing Watch?

Well, there are links back to the original articles...he really did say all of those crazy things.

 

[Astronuc]

"Stop The Right Wing!", gimme money, says that banner block add on that Carson web reference. Should I contribute before collecting dubious facts from the journalists at Right Wing Watch?

I simply linked to the video in order to hear Carson in his own words, in order to determine whether he actually said what was attributed to him. I heard what he said in his own words, in his own voice.

It's kind of interesting that the video of Lauren Steward's interview with Ben Carson is not on AFR or some other media organization.

Here it is on youtube - (but with an RWW logo).

So where is the video on a non-partisan site, or even a Fox, or AFR/AFA site?

 

[mheslep]

...

So where is the video on a non-partisan site, or even a Fox, or AFR/AFA site?

http://radio.foxnews.com/2014/12/01/ben-carson-womens-lib-led-to-ferguson/

 

[DavidSnider]

http://radio.foxnews.com/2014/12/01/ben-carson-womens-lib-led-to-ferguson/

That article links to rightwingwatch...

 

[Astronuc]

Ben Carson's appeal - https://www.yahoo.com/politics/playing-now-the-ben-carson-show-128746591126.html

Some interesting comments.

While Trump just about writhes with insecurity and calls everybody in politics an idiot, Carson projects an easy confidence and barely speaks above a whisper.

Trump is reality TV, explosive and unscripted. Carson is a miniseries, evocative and reaffirming.

There’s a danger in attaching such significance to inexperienced politicians, as we’ve learned. Obama spent too much of his presidency improvising a governing philosophy and figuring out how to deal with vast bureaucracies and recalcitrant adversaries. As much as Democrats may hate to hear it, the truth is that someone with more political experience would probably have found his footing a lot sooner.

 

[Evo]

More on Ben Carson beliefs. I know some of you will agree, others disagree, just listing his current position.

Climate change: The climate change debate is “irrelevant.” Temperature change is cyclical.

Carson is not convinced that global warming is a threat or a proven trend.

Guns: Few limits on ownership except for the mentally ill or those convicted of violent crime. he wants to give Americans as much access as possible to the weapons

Marijuana: There are some benefits to medical marijuana. Legalizing for recreational purpose raises concern. He called the substance a “gateway drug” and said that easier access could harm society.

Social issues: The Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage is the law of the land. In a statement issued after the Supreme Court ruling, Carson wrote that he disagrees with the decision to legalize same-sex marriage but that it is now the law of the land. The physician previously has argued that homosexuality is a choice and that he personally believes marriage is between a man and a woman.

more...http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/ben-carson-believe-candidate-stands-10-issues/

From a recent interview relating to the LGBT marriage ruling.

Yesterday on Newsmax TV, Ben Carson said that the federal government does not need to recognize a Supreme Court decision on gay marriage because the president is only obligated to recognize laws passed by Congress, not judicial rulings.

“First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works, the president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch,” Carson said. “So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesn’t say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law.”

He also added that members of the judiciary should have term limits in order to “adjust with the times.”

Carson, who announced his campaign for president on Monday, has previously floated the idea of impeaching judges who back marriage equality.

- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...y-marriage-scotus-ruling#sthash.qUQibzA4.dpuf

 

[Jeff Rosenbury]

It appears to be his beliefs, but you can believe whatever you want, I suppose you have the sources where he denies saying those things?

Nope. Don't know; don't care.

I'm not big on the constant election cycle. I'll wait a bit before researching or deciding.

 

[Evo]

Nope. Don't know; don't care.

I'm not big on the constant election cycle. I'll wait a bit before researching or deciding.

Remember to read the rules for posting in Current Events here https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/must-read-current-events-guidelines.113181/

I'll let you slide this time, but the next time you state something, you need to back that up with an acceptable source.

 

[Jeff Rosenbury]

Remember to read the rules for posting in Current Events here https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/must-read-current-events-guidelines.113181/

I'll let you slide this time, but the next time you state something, you need to back that up with an acceptable source.

Sorry. I care more now. More about Physics Forum anyway.

From "OnTheIssues": Ben Carson supports Legal binding relationship for gays to enjoy property rights.

However, my comment was on cherry picking quotes by opposition groups.

Here's a Wikipedia page on cherry picking. Cherry picking is the fallacy of, "pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position." My quote above shows Carson's position is more nuanced than Right Wing Watch presents. Note, it is not needed for the quotes to be wrong, simply be presented in an unbalanced way.

To show Right Wing Watch is an opposition group, we need to go to their "about Right Wing Watch" page. They state, "We do not endorse the views of groups that we report on."

I still neither support nor oppose the good doctor. It's way too early for campaigning, IMO. [That was an opinion. I hope I don't need a cite for that.]

If you find my sources unacceptable, let me know. I'll find others.

 

[Evo]

From "OnTheIssues": Ben Carson supports Legal binding relationship for gays to enjoy property rights.

But he is against same sex marriage (from your link).

And yes, be sure to post sources according to the guidelines. this will be very important as we get closer to the election.

Also this is interesting.

And on Wednesday, when asked about a possible Supreme Court decision to overturn bans on same-sex marriage,

Carson responded: First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works, the president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch. So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibility to carry it out. It doesn't say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law.

There's no such thing as a "judicial law." He's badly confusing judicial review, as established by Marbury v. Madison, with something he just made up -- judicial law. The Supreme Court merely upholds or strikes down existing laws. It doesn't create new laws, therefore the president can't possibly carry out those laws since they don't exist.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/gop-candidate-ben-carson-_b_7261436.html

 

[Evo]

To show Right Wing Watch is an opposition group, we need to go to their "about Right Wing Watch" page. They state, "We do not endorse the views of groups that we report on."

So, it's a disclaimer that they do not "endorse", nothing wrong with that. I don't endorse most (if any) of the candidates that I post about.

 

[DavidSnider]

"pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position."

Pointing out that Ben Carson doesn't support gay marriage is not 'cherry picking' because he supports gay couples having 'property rights'. They are not contradictory positions for one and for the other, there is only a sample of 2 statements.

 

[Jeff Rosenbury]

My understanding of legal theory is that judicial review only makes laws unenforceable in the courts. [opinion] It should not be able to force actions. For that there's a "writ of mandamus". But that must be from a superior court to an inferior official. (The president would be an equal to SCOTUS.) It also needs to enforce a law, not a judicial review issue. So technically I think he's right.

Still, the law is what people say it is. [again opinion] Few Americans would be happy with a public official standing on such a fine point, again IMO.

 

[BobG]

Realistically, Republican polls are probably best understood by the fact that 54% of Republicans prefer a candidate that has never held elective office before (http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/donald-trump-ben-carson-cnn-poll/).

Ironic that as the world gets more complicated and the US harder to govern effectively, Republicans have become so frustrated that they're seemingly willing to let amateurs try their hand at something the professionals have immense difficulty doing.

Personally, I kind of see that line of reasoning having some serious problems. Kind of like deciding your dentist charges too much money for a simple filling, so you walk down the street to your buddy that has a power drill and a son that deals heroin. Surely they can do as good a job as your dentist and for only a six-pack of beer, no less.

 

[Astronuc]

A CNN/ORC national poll of likely GOP primary voters released Thursday found Carson in second place in the Republican nomination race behind Trump and with a double-digit lead over rivals, including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. According to the poll, 19 percent of Republicans are backing Carson — a 10-point surge since early August — compared to 30 percent for Trump and 9 percent for Bush.

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/ben-carson-is-relying-on-a-time-honored-iowa-128788818625.html

in Iowa, Carson has erased Trump’s edge. A slew of recent polls — including a Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics survey — found the former surgeon narrowly trailing Trump among likely GOP caucus-goers. Another poll from Monmouth University released last week found Trump and Carson tied among Iowa Republicans.

 

[mheslep]

Republicans have become so frustrated that they're seemingly willing to let amateurs try their hand at something the professionals have immense difficulty doing.

In the 2008 democratic primary, which candidate had by far the least experience in federal office or state governorship?

 

[DavidSnider]

Republicans have become so frustrated that they're seemingly willing to let amateurs try their hand at something the professionals have immense difficulty doing.

In the 2008 democratic primary, which candidate had by far the least experience in federal office or state governorship?

The difference is that they didn't pick Obama out of frustration, but because he was better than people who have been doing this for decades.

 

[Czcibor]

But he is against same sex marriage (from your link).

I think that you approach here the problem too logically, while it contains somewhat high ideological content. Quite a few conservatives (seems from brought links that it maybe the case) are OK with granting homosexuals some quasi-marriage rights, as long as it is not called a marriage.

Realistically, Republican polls are probably best understood by the fact that 54% of Republicans prefer a candidate that has never held elective office before (http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/donald-trump-ben-carson-cnn-poll/).

Unfortunately the problem seems more popular. In my country there is something like 20% of voters who you could only charm by showing how anti-establishment and not related to any politics are you. In last presidential election in Poland the no. 3 candidate with 20% of votes was a rock musician with no clear program (except of course being anti-establishment) and brain seriously damaged by alcohol.

The only good thing is that it prevents any dictatorship, as any politicians who actually hold an office becomes a part of this rotten establishment, thus should be outvoted...

 

[Evo]

I think that you approach here the problem too logically, while it contains somewhat high ideological content. Quite a few conservatives (seems from brought links that it maybe the case) are OK with granting homosexuals some quasi-marriage rights, as long as it is not called a marriage.

Unfortunately the problem seems more popular. In my country there is something like 20% of voters who you could only charm by showing how anti-establishment and not related to any politics are you. In last presidential election in Poland the no. 3 candidate with 20% of votes was a rock musician with no clear program (except of course being anti-establishment) and brain seriously damaged by alcohol.

The only good thing is that it prevents any dictatorship, as any politicians who actually hold an office becomes a part of this rotten establishment, thus should be outvoted...

That is the problem.