Who Will You Vote For in 2012?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Red_Wolf said:
Ron Paul is the only viable candidate from the standpoint of leading this country where it needs to go. The others are just variations of how to slide down.

If Ron Paul is unelectable, then this country if finished. I suspect that what makes him “unelectable” is the unwavering desire of some to see this country go down the drain.
Click to expand...
Ron Paul is unelectable. He will be lucky to break 10%… my guess is he will get about 7% of the republican primary vote as he has before.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
So, you then believe that the Federal Government has the Constitutional authority to force us to be nice to each other? Wow, I seriously don’t want to live in your world dude.
Click to expand...
I never said that. Scott, you often make interesting and insightful comments, even if I disagree with them. Putting words in other people’s mouths is beneath you.
 
gilliam said:
Ron Paul is unelectable. He will be lucky to break 10%… my guess is he will get about 7% of the republican primary vote as he has before.
Click to expand...
I would guess you’re correct. Now, let’s find out what those other issues are that make the other Republicans so attractive that only the very conservative will vote for them in the first election?
 
Ridgerunner said:
I understand what you’re saying, though i don’t believe it’s “Ron Paul or doom” for the U.S. So, you don’t like all other imaginable Republicans. I get it. But there is the further question: “What are Ron Paul people going to do if he’s not the nominee?” Gonna throw away your vote and help Obama take this country into the tank faster than the worst Republican you can possibly dream up? Are you going to sit by in a snit so the abortion promoters win? It’s highly unlikely Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate, so are you going to help Obama by writing Paul in just to show how miffed you are that the voters didn’t choose him for the nominee?

Honestly, if I was in charge of the Obama campaign, I would encourage that kind of attitude in the Ron Paul supporters. Likely that’s exactly what the DNC is doing; perhaps even in places like CAF. They aren’t stupid. When the 2012 election comes around, they will be in here just like they were in 2008, encouraging prolife people to throw their votes away on third parties and write-ins.

Are prolifers really going to let the abortion promoters manipulate us that way? I would hope not. Support Ron Paul all you want for the primary if that’s how you feel about him. Maybe he’ll be the nominee and maybe he won’t. But in the general, don’t give abortion a pass.

I don’t like Ron Paul at all, but if he’s the nominee, I’ll vote for him anyway, precisely because I don’t want to fail to oppose abortion.
Click to expand...
Precisely stated Ridgerunner. I don’t like Ron Paul either, but if he were the Republican nomination I would cast my vote for him. What is obvious here is the all or nothing attitude of the libertarian view of things. It’s like a playground dispute “it’s my ball and I’m taking it home.”
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
I would guess you’re correct. Now, let’s find out what those other issues are that make the other Republicans so attractive that only the very conservative will vote for them in the first election?
Click to expand...
Or if that doesn’t work for you, delve a little further into how Obama came from nowhere to be elected president and his connections to people whose motives as far as our country is concerned are at the least suspect.
 
mary_bobo said:
Or if that doesn’t work for you, delve a little further into how Obama came from nowhere to be elected president and his connections to people whose motives as far as our country is concerned are at the least suspect.
Click to expand...
Are we going to starting disqualifying anyone, anytime someone comes up with another conspiracy theory?

If Pontius Pilate had no authority, except the authority from the Father, who else has received authority from other than through the Father’s will?

Certain posters are beating the ‘democrat’ horse, as if it’s the only evil that exists in politics. It’s politics in general.

Now there are a lot of Ron Paul supporters vocalizing their support. This appears to shake up the ‘far right’ crowd. By any means necessary, they must protect other far right issues. What are they, that they cannot be spoken about for fear of alienating the moderates here? I’m talking about ‘real’ issues and none of the conspiracy theory stuff people tend to reach for…
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Now there are a lot of Ron Paul supporters vocalizing their support. This appears to shake up the ‘far right’ crowd. By any means necessary, they must protect other far right issues. What are they, that they cannot be spoken about for fear of alienating the moderates here? I’m talking about ‘real’ issues and none of the conspiracy theory stuff people tend to reach for…
Click to expand...
The problem isn’t that Ron Paul is racist per se (I for one don’t think he is), it’s that he has a governing philosophy that should be anathema to conservatives, especially religious conservatives. The racism advertant or inadvertant in opposing the Civil Rights Act is just one symptom or consequence of a larger malady.
 
tomarin said:
The problem isn’t that Ron Paul is racist per se (I for one don’t think he is), it’s that he has a governing philosophy that should be anathema to conservatives, especially religious conservatives. The racism advertant or inadvertant in opposing the Civil Rights Act is just one symptom or consequence of a larger malady.
Click to expand...
When explanations are provided, that show it’s not for racism purposes, it is rejected in this thread because of the possibility of it existing. However, it has been discussed. Those other issues among the rest are not being discussed. Not saying it’s a conspiracy, but appears to be an avoidance of discussing any other issues. It’s better to discuss them now, than wait until a nomination is made and the general election takes place, because if it goes against the conservative right again, they will be sure to place the blame on others using the ‘single’ issue as their ‘club’. Lay all the cards on the table and let’s find a suitable nomination now, that everyone will be willing to stand behind in the general election, or accept part of the blame if it goes the same as last election. As it is right now there appears to be other issues the far right is not willing to give on to get moderates on board.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
When explanations are provided, that show it’s not for racism purposes, it is rejected in this thread because of the possibility of it existing. However, it has been discussed. Those other issues among the rest are not being discussed. Not saying it’s a conspiracy, but appears to be an avoidance of discussing any other issues. It’s better to discuss them now, than wait until a nomination is made and the general election takes place, because if it goes against the conservative right again, they will be sure to place the blame on others using the ‘single’ issue as their ‘club’. Lay all the cards on the table and let’s find a suitable nomination now, that everyone will be willing to stand behind in the general election, or accept part of the blame if it goes the same as last election.
Click to expand...
I would say foreign policy is another big issue where most conservatives (if not most Americans) would find Ron Paul’s positions troubing. Don’t worry, all these things will come out, especially if Ron Paul’s campaign proves to have legs.
 
TMC said:
I never said that. Scott, you often make interesting and insightful comments, even if I disagree with them. Putting words in other people’s mouths is beneath you.
Click to expand...
THat is what the Civil Rights Act does. It doesn’t just disallow people tio discriminate, it opened the door to all this Equal Opportunity nonsense that we have now. Hiring quotas, etc… all came out of CRA. So, to ask the question, what about interstate commerce gives the federal government the right to tell a corner bodega that he cannot refuse to serve someone because of skin color? Listen, I hate racism and if you examine my life, it is patently obvious. If I discovered the corner store refused to serve hispanic people, I would stand out front of the store with a sign calling the store owners a bunch of bigots. I would tell potential customers that the owner was a racist. When the owner’s ignorant and ridiculous business practices hurts HIS bottom line, he will either change or his store will go out of business. Either way, problem solved. No government needed. Now, you just lodge a complaint to the FTC and they send in stormtroopers to raid the business, shut it down, and haul the owner off to jail. Yes, he goes to jail for being stupid. That is why I said, lets just pass a law that makes it illegal to be stupid, because that is what racism is. In a truely free country, people are allowed to be stupid. We have progressed to the point in this country where we don’t need the federal government to come in a force us to be nice to each other or they will throw us in jail. I didn’t put words in your mouth, I just drew the escalating effects that were set into motion with the CRA64 to their logical conclussion.
 
tomarin said:
I would say foreign policy is another big issue where most conservatives (if not most Americans) would find Ron Paul’s positions troubing. Don’t worry, all these things will come out, especially if Ron Paul’s campaign proves to have legs.
Click to expand...
Ya, God forbid. Ron Paul is a non-interventionist. He doesn’t believe that our place is as the world police force. Look at NATO. We are one member of over a dozen nations, yet we do 90% of the heavy lifting. All that comes off the sweat off your back. Does it comfort you to know that Greece can have mandatory retirement at age 60 with full benefits because their defense is being paid for by your tax money?
 
tomarin said:
The problem isn’t that Ron Paul is racist per se (I for one don’t think he is), it’s that he has a governing philosophy that should be anathema to conservatives, especially religious conservatives. The racism advertant or inadvertant in opposing the Civil Rights Act is just one symptom or consequence of a larger malady.
Click to expand...
I thought that we had the Church to teach us to love one another. Why do we need the Federal Government as well?
 
tomarin said:
I would say foreign policy is another big issue where most conservatives (if not most Americans) would find Ron Paul’s positions troubing. Don’t worry, all these things will come out, especially if Ron Paul’s campaign proves to have legs.
Click to expand...
Yes, stopping the spending, destruction and death on endless war is troubling.
Blessed are the war mongers.
 
jam070406 said:
Yes, stopping the spending, destruction and death on endless war is troubling.
Blessed are the war mongers.
Click to expand...
Ya, can you give me the book, chapter and verse reference on that? Maybe its in the New Conservative Gospel - Republican Edition, which I threw away a couple of years ago in favor of the Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Ya, can you give me the book, chapter and verse reference on that? Maybe its in the New Conservative Gospel - Republican Edition, which I threw away a couple of years ago in favor of the Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition.
Click to expand...
The current Pontiff and his predecessor must have been reading the wrong translation as well.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
When explanations are provided, that show it’s not for racism purposes, it is rejected in this thread because of the possibility of it existing. However, it has been discussed. .
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter whether his opposition to the civil rights act was based on racism or not. I tend to believe it was not but we still have a candidate who embracesa political philosophy that would’ve allowed segregation to remain in the South under the guise of personal liberty. The idea that the government should have no involvement whatsoever in our lives is just is specious as a liberal idea of the nanny state.

Eliminating the Federal Reserve & returning us to the gold standard is not going to solve the economic problems in this country. Withdrawing from the UN ,closing overseas bases and bringing troops home is not going to make us safer nor is it in any way a coherent foreign policy.

He offers no real solutions-just simplistic solutions to complex problems based on a flawed political philosophy. He is not going to win the Republican nomination and unless he can to convince his supporters to be as gracious in losing than as he is going to be (he said he will not run as a third-party candidate and will support the Republican nominee) they will make it much harder to beat Barack Obama.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Are we going to starting disqualifying anyone, anytime someone comes up with another conspiracy theory?

If Pontius Pilate had no authority, except the authority from the Father, who else has received authority from other than through the Father’s will?

Certain posters are beating the ‘democrat’ horse, as if it’s the only evil that exists in politics. It’s politics in general.

Now there are a lot of Ron Paul supporters vocalizing their support. This appears to shake up the ‘far right’ crowd. By any means necessary, they must protect other far right issues. What are they, that they cannot be spoken about for fear of alienating the moderates here? I’m talking about ‘real’ issues and none of the conspiracy theory stuff people tend to reach for…
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you consider "far right’ or “moderate”. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by both terms.

I could be wrong, but I don’t think most of Ron Paul’s positions “shake up” many conservatives I know. To the extent he “shakes up” conservatives at all, it’s mostly three things. First, the perception, at least, that he is isolationist to an extreme. Second, his position re the Federal Reserve seems troubling to conservatives, many of whom think it really is necessary, if sometimes exasperating. Third, his libertarianism as regards things like drug legalization is not widely shared.

But as compared to Obama? I think most conservatives would hold their noses and vote for Ron Paul before they would vote for Obama, if it came to that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top