S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Ohh ya, a Paul/Napolitano ticket, that would be awesome.
Two guys who actually understand how the Constitution works.
- Status
Two guys who actually understand how the Constitution works.
I
ishii
Guest
Do you make anything of Bachmann’s association with a church that seems to be anti-Catholic, and the possibility of her evangelical christianity influencing her foreign policy views, such as regards Israel?
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
Marco Rubio is pretty conservative, as are many hispanics who are Cuban-American. Putting him on the ticket would help solidify the conservative base of the GOP as well as help deliver Florida. He is a great speaker and whoever he ran with (Pawlenty, e.g.) would have to be careful not to be upstaged. The GOP needs to expand its appeal, and there are quite a few potential leaders who can accomplish this: Nikki Haley and Bobby Jindal are of Indian descent. Bachmann and Palin go against the “good old boy” style of politics - Palin challenged the establishment in her own party in Alaska and was able to accomplish quite a bit of reform in Alaska in her two years as governor. Hopefully the GOP understands that even if most of their ideas are timeless, they might need to have a more diverse set of leaders who can articulate why conservative values make sense. I think one issue they could use would be education - vouchers, challenging the teacher’s unions, etc. Education is an issue that cuts across class/racial lines.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
I agree.
And they have to contend with legislatures and hammer out state budgets, etc. Good training for the presidency - much better training than being in the senate where everyone is called “my distinguished colleague.” That said, Senators might get more hands on foreign policy experience, especially if they are on a committee that deals with foreign affairs. If foreign policy is a big issue in an election, then I can see the senator perhaps having an advantage over the governor. Reagan was unique among governors as he was well versed and studied foreign policy prior to the 1980 election. He took on William F. Buckley and George Will (!!) in a debate in 1978 on the Panamal Canal treaty and held his own. He was one of a kind.
I like listening to Chris Christie - he’s a plain talker who tells it like it is, but also is able to compromise with his legislature to get things done. I like how he doesn’t back down from those who ask him questions, such as the recent one who asked him about education and where he sends his childrenn to school.
I agree with your analysis here. McCain wouldn’t take the gloves off against Obama, and that is perhaps a characteristic of senators. I recall the “where’s the beef” becoming Walter Mondale’s campaign slogan against Gary Hart in 1984. That was back when the Democratic candidates would tell the American people - “if elected I will raise your taxes and spend your money” - and then go on to get trounced by the Republicans. Those were the good old days… then they wised up and figured out that they needed to run a “centrist” like Clinton in order to have a chance to win.
Agreed. But I think Reagan, while he tore Carter to pieces, also had a depth of understanding of the issues - whereby he could hold his own in a tough interview. He was fairly quick on his feet and avoided gaffes. If he could hold his own against Buckley or George Will, then he could handle any interviewer. He also had a lot of campaign experience. The same couldn’t be said of Palin in 2008.
Or Perry/Bachmann. However, I think a Governor/senator ticket like Pawlenty/Rubio or Pawlenty/Jindal. would be quite effective against Obama/Biden.
Ishii
meltzerboy
New member
I should have said Cuban American voters instead of Cuban voters, and Conservative instead of Republican. Jindal has a similar low-keyed personality as Pawlenty. Maybe a little more charisma is needed for either the Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidate. On the other hand, I’d like to believe that voters are more interested in the issues than the personalities and charisma of the candidates, although, unfortunately, I know better. Bachmann may be the only true Conservative in the lot. Is her church really anti-Catholic? Your mention of vouchers and challenging the teachers’ unions reminds me why I don’t vote Republican. But who knows?
I
ishii
Guest
Well, I think that some of the reforms to education that might help give those in inner cities better education and more opportunities are opposed by the teacher’s unions which seem to want a continuation of the status quo. Whichever way you feel about the issue, approaching the education from the standpoint of reform vs. the status quo would be a possible GOP winning issue and could appeal to minorities. The other thing about some of these governors is that they are viewed as very successful by the voters in their states and they win re-election. I believe Bobby Jindal currently has a 77% approval in his state and seems well on his way to winning re-election. He must be doing something right. That is in stark contrast to Obama who seems to be doing almost everything wrong.
Ishii
R
Red_Wolf
Guest
People:
This thread, and the last two, are getting sidetracked on superfluous issues.
There are few.
Abortion is the main issue, as it is an intrinsic evil.
Government “uber alles” is another.
National soverignity; control of our borders; and nation.
Foreign intrigues, involving troops, bombs, etc. is another.
And there is always: the economy.
Abortion is an evil. Those of us who have read Dr. Paul’s books realize his take, and what was going on at the time Roe versus Wade became law. All those who state that abortion was illegal at the time the Constitution was written; please give your sources. If you can, JUST ONE, Roe versus Wade falls on it’s butt.
I think the only way to end abortion in our country is a Constitutional amendment. All those who want to play eternal politics with the issue, trying to adjust SCOTUS, please raise your sorry hands.
We are seeing run away government, wanting to micro-control everything. How did that happen? The short answer is the Federal Reserve. Central bank, with the powers over currency, that the Constitution gives to congress. The FED can devalue our currency. Long story short, that gives the government access to your savings, even if burried in your yard, without so much as a “by your leave”. It’s a dream come true, for government. Being a relatively free people, we conscented to the federal reserve relatively late, other countries already had their equivalents.
What came from that? WWI, then the bubble of the 1920’s, then the great depression. Then WWII, then the cold war. Then several bubbles, and busts. Then came 2008. Not quite fair, peak oil also plays into that. But nobody wants to deal with reality even to look into what peak oil is. I’ll tell you. Bottom line: we can’t “grow our way” out of this.
We are entering into agreements that let foreign governments control what they should not. The ESA is an example. We are also NOT enforcing our borders. Tell me, who has opposed this longer than Dr. Ron Paul?
Everyone runs for President lately, seems to have their own war that they want the US to persue. Ron Paul wants to persue PEACE (so does Dennis Kucinich, but he’s not a viable candidate either; been right on too many issues for the media to accept him).
The economy, what is left of it. “Free Trade”, under whatever acronym, allows businesses to bypass all our environmental regulations, unions, unending governmental regulations and red tape and taxes. It is a freedom for business, that our citizens can only dream of. Government also ties the hands of our businesses (not to mention kicking them in the privates, like, really hard) when they try to export (I can think of several firms that have had to shut their doors in the US, and move abroad, JUST SO THAT THEY COULD EXPORT TO THE WORLD MARKET). Ron Paul is the only one running that even addresses this.
Ron Paul has been in congress; on, and off, and on; since the mid 1970’s. He has a Consistent track record. He has addressed the major issues, even those the common man didn’t want brought ot his attention (exceept peak oil) the whole way.
Look at the others. Their track records are either dismal; or short AND spotty. That is why Ron Paul supporters are so emphatic. The only thing against Ron Paul is all those “talking heads” saying that he is unelectable. The ONLY thing recommending the others is the “talking heads” saying that they are electable. If you want this country to survive, please look into what REALLY IS. And then work for Ron Paul.
If you just want to feel good, because you voted for someone other than Obama, disragard this post; and watch our country go down (knowng that you did your part; you voted against Obama).
This thread, and the last two, are getting sidetracked on superfluous issues.
There are few.
Abortion is the main issue, as it is an intrinsic evil.
Government “uber alles” is another.
National soverignity; control of our borders; and nation.
Foreign intrigues, involving troops, bombs, etc. is another.
And there is always: the economy.
Abortion is an evil. Those of us who have read Dr. Paul’s books realize his take, and what was going on at the time Roe versus Wade became law. All those who state that abortion was illegal at the time the Constitution was written; please give your sources. If you can, JUST ONE, Roe versus Wade falls on it’s butt.
I think the only way to end abortion in our country is a Constitutional amendment. All those who want to play eternal politics with the issue, trying to adjust SCOTUS, please raise your sorry hands.
We are seeing run away government, wanting to micro-control everything. How did that happen? The short answer is the Federal Reserve. Central bank, with the powers over currency, that the Constitution gives to congress. The FED can devalue our currency. Long story short, that gives the government access to your savings, even if burried in your yard, without so much as a “by your leave”. It’s a dream come true, for government. Being a relatively free people, we conscented to the federal reserve relatively late, other countries already had their equivalents.
What came from that? WWI, then the bubble of the 1920’s, then the great depression. Then WWII, then the cold war. Then several bubbles, and busts. Then came 2008. Not quite fair, peak oil also plays into that. But nobody wants to deal with reality even to look into what peak oil is. I’ll tell you. Bottom line: we can’t “grow our way” out of this.
We are entering into agreements that let foreign governments control what they should not. The ESA is an example. We are also NOT enforcing our borders. Tell me, who has opposed this longer than Dr. Ron Paul?
Everyone runs for President lately, seems to have their own war that they want the US to persue. Ron Paul wants to persue PEACE (so does Dennis Kucinich, but he’s not a viable candidate either; been right on too many issues for the media to accept him).
The economy, what is left of it. “Free Trade”, under whatever acronym, allows businesses to bypass all our environmental regulations, unions, unending governmental regulations and red tape and taxes. It is a freedom for business, that our citizens can only dream of. Government also ties the hands of our businesses (not to mention kicking them in the privates, like, really hard) when they try to export (I can think of several firms that have had to shut their doors in the US, and move abroad, JUST SO THAT THEY COULD EXPORT TO THE WORLD MARKET). Ron Paul is the only one running that even addresses this.
Ron Paul has been in congress; on, and off, and on; since the mid 1970’s. He has a Consistent track record. He has addressed the major issues, even those the common man didn’t want brought ot his attention (exceept peak oil) the whole way.
Look at the others. Their track records are either dismal; or short AND spotty. That is why Ron Paul supporters are so emphatic. The only thing against Ron Paul is all those “talking heads” saying that he is unelectable. The ONLY thing recommending the others is the “talking heads” saying that they are electable. If you want this country to survive, please look into what REALLY IS. And then work for Ron Paul.
If you just want to feel good, because you voted for someone other than Obama, disragard this post; and watch our country go down (knowng that you did your part; you voted against Obama).
I
ishii
Guest
My hand is raised. A constitutional amendment must pass by 2/3 of the house AND the senate. Do you think there are enough pro-life members in the Senate? I don’t. And even if the amendment passed the House and Senate it woud have to be ratified by 3/4 of the states(38 of 50, or if you’re Obama, perhaps 42 out of 57 states). Considering how many blue states there are I think its highly unlikely that a constitutional amendment to end abortion will pass. Anyone who thinks so is not in touch with the political reality of our country. SCOTUS, on the other hand, needs one more justice (maybe two to be sure) in order to overturn Roe V Wade and return the issue to the states. I believe that in the next ten years, there will be likely three vacancies - Breyer, Ginsburg and (unfortunately) Scalia. If they can be replaced with a strick constructionist, then Roe V Wade will likely be overturned.
Sorry, a 77 year old libertarian congressman who wants to legalize pot will not be our next president. That is the political reality.
No, you’ve got it backwards: If you want to feel good, then vote for the “perfect, true-believer” candidate who has no chance of winning. If you want to make a difference, then vote for a candidate who can actually win. He/she might not be your “perfect” candidate, but they can make a difference and can win. Who do you want to choose the next supreme court justices, Obama or someone like Michelle Bachmann or Pawlenty?
Ishii
D
Dale_M
Guest
I’m going to post this news item in this thread, because I think the World News forum is already overrun with threads about US politics. The article is about the results of theIowa Poll, which is a long running poll in Iowa with a history of accuracy.
Iowa Poll: Romney, Bachmann lead Republican pack
Here is an analysis of the results, for each declared candidate:
caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/06/26/iowa-poll-results-a-breakdown/
However, 69% said they are open to changing their minds, with 14% saying they do not have not picked a first choice. 86% say that regardless of who the Republicans nominate, that candidate will likely defeat President Obama.
caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/06/26/iowa-poll-results-a-breakdown/
So the poll has the race in Iowa currently as:
Iowa Poll: Romney, Bachmann lead Republican pack
caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/06/26/iowa-poll-romney-bachmann-lead-republican-pack/
Here is an analysis of the results, for each declared candidate:
caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/06/26/iowa-poll-results-a-breakdown/
However, 69% said they are open to changing their minds, with 14% saying they do not have not picked a first choice. 86% say that regardless of who the Republicans nominate, that candidate will likely defeat President Obama.
caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/06/26/iowa-poll-results-a-breakdown/
So the poll has the race in Iowa currently as:
- Romney (tie)
- Bachmann (tie)
- Cain
- Gingrich (tie)
- Paul (tie)
- Pawlenty
- Santorum
- Huntsman
R
Red_Wolf
Guest
ishii:
75% of the states sufices; no need for congress or the president. We are about one, or two, states shy. You did NOT site a law against abortion, at the time of the Constitution; so: you may NOT raise your hand.
Ron Paul is GOP. He accepted the Libertarian nomination, after he lost patience with Ron Reagan and left politics. When he ran again, it was as GOP. This is important; between on and off, and redistricting, he has won his seat, AS A CHALLENGER, three times (if memory serves). Would have been just as easy as an independent, or libertarian.
ishii:
Hemp is a fiber, used in clothing, car parts, “health foods”, etc. If you think legalizing American growers to participate in those markets is a disqualification; what other markets do you think Americans should be banned from particiatng in?
ishii:
Bachmann and Pawlenty have VERY short track records; and they are spotty. If you want to sucumb to socialist totaliarism under a GOP banner, vote for one of them. If you want to be free, vote for Ron Paul.
I will qualify, a bit. I live in a state that will go to the GOP, whatever. I am free to vote for a 3rd party, knowing that my state’s electorial votes will go to the GOP (a 3rd party ever takes x% of the vote, they will get matching federal funds to “become real”; and the GOP would also have to “become real”, rather than Democrat lite). I am a member of the GOP, but, I have voted other than Democrat or GOP for president for many years now; knowing that my state will fall into the GOP. By member, I mean elected (party, not public), voting, member; as in deligate to the state convention. I see what goes on between elections. And I am not exaggerating; the GOP is in an internal battle for it’s heart and soul.
From OTHER threads, I have a lot of respect for you. This thread; you are dead wrong; dead being the operative word.
Were there other candidates met minimum qualifications, would be another story. BUT THERE IS NO OTHER CANDIDATE EVEN APPROACHES PAUL IN EVEN ONE OF MANY CATAGORIES. Ron Paul would drastically reduce abortions, if not manage to outlaw them. The others are just “pie in the sky” promises.
75% of the states sufices; no need for congress or the president. We are about one, or two, states shy. You did NOT site a law against abortion, at the time of the Constitution; so: you may NOT raise your hand.
Ron Paul is GOP. He accepted the Libertarian nomination, after he lost patience with Ron Reagan and left politics. When he ran again, it was as GOP. This is important; between on and off, and redistricting, he has won his seat, AS A CHALLENGER, three times (if memory serves). Would have been just as easy as an independent, or libertarian.
ishii:
Hemp is a fiber, used in clothing, car parts, “health foods”, etc. If you think legalizing American growers to participate in those markets is a disqualification; what other markets do you think Americans should be banned from particiatng in?
ishii:
Bachmann and Pawlenty have VERY short track records; and they are spotty. If you want to sucumb to socialist totaliarism under a GOP banner, vote for one of them. If you want to be free, vote for Ron Paul.
I will qualify, a bit. I live in a state that will go to the GOP, whatever. I am free to vote for a 3rd party, knowing that my state’s electorial votes will go to the GOP (a 3rd party ever takes x% of the vote, they will get matching federal funds to “become real”; and the GOP would also have to “become real”, rather than Democrat lite). I am a member of the GOP, but, I have voted other than Democrat or GOP for president for many years now; knowing that my state will fall into the GOP. By member, I mean elected (party, not public), voting, member; as in deligate to the state convention. I see what goes on between elections. And I am not exaggerating; the GOP is in an internal battle for it’s heart and soul.
From OTHER threads, I have a lot of respect for you. This thread; you are dead wrong; dead being the operative word.
Were there other candidates met minimum qualifications, would be another story. BUT THERE IS NO OTHER CANDIDATE EVEN APPROACHES PAUL IN EVEN ONE OF MANY CATAGORIES. Ron Paul would drastically reduce abortions, if not manage to outlaw them. The others are just “pie in the sky” promises.
I
ishii
Guest
What? I raised my hand in answer to your question, “All those who want to play eternal politics with the issue, trying to adjust SCOTUS, please raise your sorry hands.” But you’re right, I shouldn’t have raised my hand - I don’t want to play eternal politics. I simply don’t think the constitutional amendment is viable. If we’re only a few states short, which ones would we need to persuade? Also, are you aware that for the amendment to happen the way you want, 2/3 of the states would have to call for a constitutional convention? And, to date, none of the 27 amendments to the constitution have come about by a constitutional convention? Again, I am all for making the effort, but I don’t think it would be succcessful. Getting one more justice on the supreme court, on the other hand, to join Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts, might be the most realistic route considering political reality.
Wow, is that the smell I get from the annual hempfest? Fiber and clothing? Amazing. Why are all of the participants bleary eyed? And why all of the Reggae music?
Bachmann, yes. Pawlenty, on the other hand, has a relatively long track record as governor of Iowa - eight years, and ten years as a state rep. He wants to cut social security and medicare to balance the budget. ( I suppose that show-off Ron Paul wants to eliminate them altogether). He may not be a libertarian, but he has a decent chance of getting the nomination and choosing the next supreme court justices. I don’t think Ron Paul is the savior. He’s a politician like the rest - he can, from the safety of his position, say whatever he want to say about abolishing this program or that program, but the reason he says whatever he wants is because he knows that he doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell of winning or perhaps more accurately, he doesn’t care if he loses. Same goes for all of these other 3rd party - “perfect” candidates. They can say whatever they want because no one except the true believers are really listening. If I depended on Ron Paul for my freedom I would be in big trouble. Fortunately I don’t.
Thanks, I think. Why is “dead” the operative word?
By the way, you didn’t answer my question: Who do you want to choose the next supreme court justices, Obama or the GOP nominee? And one more: Show me the historical precedent for a congressman who is 77 years old winning the presidency.
Ron Paul can’t “drastically reduce or outlaw abortions” but maybe his son Rand Paul can: as a senator he will be voting to confirm the next supreme court nominees.
Ishii
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
I am not voting for Pope or anti-pope, I am voting for someone to stop the intrusive spread of government and get the spending, deficit, and debt under control. If they have a plan and a track record of doing these this, along with a public position that Israel has a right to exists, like every other sovereign nation, then they could worship at the Church of the Flying SPaghetti Monster and it wouldn’t make much difference to me.
E
estesbob
Guest
Bachmann has long public record and there’s never been any indications that either of these concerns has ever been an issue in anything she has done.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/27/bachmann-2012-bid-not-personal-against-obama/
Bachmann officially announces. I have to say that I like her forthrightness and generally her position on the issues and especially the fact that she is not Barack Obama.
J
jam070406
Guest
Agreed. I like her.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/27/bachmann-2012-bid-not-personal-against-obama/
Bachmann officially announces. I have to say that I like her forthrightness and generally her position on the issues and especially the fact that she is not Barack Obama.
I
ishii
Guest
At a Republican Jewish Coalition event in Los Angeles last week, Rep. Michele Bachmann offered a candid view of her positions on Israel: Support for Israel is handed down by God and if the United States pulls back its support, America will cease to exist. Now, mind you, I generally support Israel too but this kind of smacks of wacky evangelical “JerUSAlem” type of bumpersticker foreign policy doesn’t it? Do we want someone who thinks like this to be president? I am more playing devil’s advocate than anything else. That said, I would vote for her over Obama.
minnesotaindependent.com/55061/bachmann-america-cursed-by-god-if-we-reject-israel
Ishii
J
jam070406
Guest
Ugh, no doubt. That sounds John Hagee stuff.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Gingrich was on some news show and he was EXCELLENT … kept his responses to under 1000 words.
Seriously, his grasp of the issues and of what has worked … going back to the 1980’s … and his articulation … were superb.
So, I’m back in the Newt Gingrich camp.
But for VP, …
Need a governor for President …
The combination that would get the left totally crazed would be Palin/Gingrich.
The pitbull and the Contract With America.
Seriously, his grasp of the issues and of what has worked … going back to the 1980’s … and his articulation … were superb.
So, I’m back in the Newt Gingrich camp.
But for VP, …
Need a governor for President …
The combination that would get the left totally crazed would be Palin/Gingrich.
The pitbull and the Contract With America.
E
ExLibris
Guest
I like Gingrich. I could see myself rallying around him if he got the nomination.
youtube.com/watch?v=qtjfMjjce2Y
newt.org/news/audit-and-reform-the-federal-reserve
youtube.com/watch?v=qtjfMjjce2Y
newt.org/news/audit-and-reform-the-federal-reserve
It’s almost mainstream.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
Don’t think that Gingrich would accept the second slot. It would have to be Gingrich -Palin.
- Status