Well, IF the Republicans nominated Ron Paul, I would vote Republican... HOWEVER, they will most likely nominate the biggest corporate WHORE on the planet, McCain....
I will be voting Libertarian.. I realize Libertarians can't win, but given the choices, the "lesser evil" makes me want to shoot myself! God have mercy on our nation... When it comes to this election, the least common denominator in intelligence will be who picks our next "leader" Ladies and gentlemen, this is going to be a very long, painful, and sad year for the United States.
My decision is a strategic one. My current plan to abstain if Senator McCain gets the GOP nod will be in hopes that the GOP loses the election, forcing them to reexamine their choice of candidates, and reevaluate their flirtations with "neoconservatism" and total fiscal irresponsibility the next time around. Of course Senator McCain will likely carry Arizona regardless of my abstention, so I am under illusions that I actually matter.
Rep. Paul is strong on the Second Amendment, but he has surrounded himself with enough lunatics that I cannot cast a vote for him. Anyway, his speaking skills are poor and he can't adequately explain his apparent inconsistencies, so Senators Clinton or Obama would eat him alive in a debate.
I do think McCain would beat the tar out of Obama in a one-on-one debate, probably reminiscent of Reagan versus Carter, and could at least hold his own with Clinton.
How is continuously voting for lousy candidates telling the GOP to "get it together?" If anything, it encourages even more lousy candidates. Voting for the lousy GOP candidates in the past has had the result of giving us "choices" like McCain, Romney, Giuliani, and our current president, none of whom are actually conservatives and most of whom are authoritarians who delight in grinding the Constitution under their heel.
How is an anti-gun, anti-rights, pro-amnesty, warmongering authoritarian better than a anti-gun, anti-rights, pro-amnesty peacenik socialist?
Enduring a few years of pain may wake up the GOP and make them realize they need to find candidates who are actual conservatives, not this current crop of liberals in conservative lipstick.
I vote two issues, and two issues only: 2nd amendment and taxation. So for those who feel the same, the choice is very clear.
At the risk of being flamed, I don't like any of the current crop of candidates. I'm extremely disappointed in the 2 politcal parties for not giving us a better choice:
Angry old man
Rich robot (who spends over $30mil of his own money to get a 250k job?)
Angry wife with no BJ for Hubby
Dubious guy with terrorist name
And none of these guys is even funny! Dubya used to be funny in a stupid kinda way, but now he's all serious and angry. The State of the Onion on Monday was boring... blah, blah, blah. The GOP hasn't had a decent candidate with a sense of humor since Bob Dole, even then it was a crazy kind of funny... referring to himself in the third person. I loved Reagan, he was funniest of them all.
Logical thinking, if you listen to the news, tells us that McCain will win Arizona Tuesday. I am not all that certain. Most of my friends are republican but some are Democrat. I have yet to hear one of them indicate they wanted Hillary, Obama or McCain. I am not in total agreement with what is left but will vote for one of them. It may take a coin toss but I refuse to NOT vote.
To not vote is to surrender to the Media selection.
Grit your teeth and do your duty be your selection right wrong or indifferent in my eyes.
i think its actually one of the great tragedies of how we select our political leaders that someone who could potentially be the greatest leader we've ever known would never get elected due to their lack of eloquence. so Ron Paul might get eaten alive in a debate due to his lack of public speaking skills and that would cost him the election, and that's just a travesty. it's not debate team or a public speaking contest but that's how we decide.
another pet peeve is our president has to look a certain way. we want them to look like someone who would play president in a movie. as mentioned before romney is mormon and so am i but i can't help but think he's a leading candidate because he looks handsome. think of it, none of the candidates are really super models but they are all average to above average looking people too.
i don't know what other basis we could use to decide, but it sure would be great if we could actually know each candidate personally and choose that way, but that is obviously impossible.
I will vote for anyone running against Hillary or Obama, period.
Obama has been endorsed by 2 people who should be "Insert Fate Here" instead of endorsing political candidates.... Louis Farrakhan and Ted Kennedy.
It's odd though... Ron Paul is being endorsed by nut jobs and has no chance. Obama is being endorsed by nut jobs and you would think God himself is running. Of course, this explains the mindset of a liberal.
Personally... I'm waiting for Paul Revere to be resurrected. I'm sick and tired of the crap.
As for Obama... I'll just finish with a couple quotes from him.
"I believe we need to renew--not roll back--this common sense gun law," Obama said. - In reference to the 1994 AWB.screw Obama.......the passage of legal protection for the gun industry would mark an enormous setback for gun control advocates and for leaders of cities such as Chicago, who have filed suit against gun dealers and manufacturers.
all that being said...
screw John McCain as well, but I will vote for the lesser of 3 evils. At this point it's who's going to screw me the least.
Last edited by js; 02-04-2008 at 02:55 AM.
"bing bang boom! hair out...hamburger time" - William Murderface
I'm giving mc2 the benefit of the doubt here. I mean, not everyone who owns a gun or is interested in them is a die-hard defender of the Second Amendment. If they were, the NRA would have a lot more than four million members.
I read his/her post more like, "I like my guns, but there are things about Senator Obama's platform that I would trade for his stance on guns." I think most people have a hierarchy of issues that are important to them, and evidently guns aren't high on mc2's list. Kinda makes me wonder why he's on a gun board, but hey, we're all about diversity, right?
Yeah, maybe troll was a bit harsh. To hear a member of a gun board say he'd be willing to give up his guns would be like hearing Rosie O'Donnell say she's willing to give up food; it's something I thought I'd never hear.
Last edited by Todd; 02-04-2008 at 10:30 AM.
If you're choosing based on the candidate's comedic talent, bank account, choice of bedroom activities, or what their name rhymes with, perhaps sticking with voting on American Idol is better entertainment. I'm sure you have better reasons.
Mike's 'benefit of the doubt' for MC2's post is gracious. Personally, it looks like pot-stirring to me. If we're lucky, I'm wrong and we'll have some solid arguments for Obama to consider.
I think this would be game over:
Rumor - When either Clinton or Obama becomes the front runner for the Democratic ticket the other is very likely to become his/her running mate.
Game over if that happens. They would get most of the Women voters, virtually all of the black voters and essentially all of the liberal vote to boot. I don't see ANY Republican that could stand a chance against that. So be ready.....if the see a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket it's over. The only thing that could save the Republicans is if you have the votes divided between Obama and Clinton......but together!........game over.
there is not going to be a clinton/obama or obama/clinton ticket
it was on the news today
I would think that both of their egos are too big to be the running mate of the other.
Besides Hillary already has Bill. Or is it the other way 'round?
To abstain from voting when the "perfect" candidate doesn't present him or herself is a serious weakness of judgement and character. It suggests to me that when a fight isn't already won, that you don't feel the need to fight it.