INGO IN Senate Straw Poll

[IndyBeerman]

3 people who have rose colored glasses on, and 1 person who sees the reality of the situation.

The simple facts is that Stutzman is simply too far behind in the polls. Any vote for Stutzman (or Bates or Behney) is a vote for Dan Coats. Its really that simple.

I had this same argument with my best friend last night, a vote for someone not capable of winning the primary will enable someone to win that we don't want to.

I used the 1992 presidential election as my example.

While Ross Perot would have been a good choice as President because he would have run the country like a business and reduce costs and spending, all that was done was take votes away from G.H.W. Bush that let Clinton win.

While it is important to vote for who you feel is right, you must also think to yourself, does he/she have a chance to prevail overall against another parties candidate.

You may ultimately have a win that ends up as a losing situation.

 

[irishfan]

I used the 1992 presidential election as my example.

While Ross Perot would have been a good choice as President because he would have run the country like a business and reduce costs and spending, all that was done was take votes away from G.H.W. Bush that let Clinton win.

I honestly can't say that G.H.W. Bush would have been any better than Clinton as he had some really pathetic ideas just like Clinton.

Back on topic....

It looks like you have to decide what element of liberty you have to give up with each of the big 3 in the Republican race.

Coats is anti-gun, Hostettler is anti-privacy, Stutzman is into globalization(UN)

When May 4th gets here you have to decide for yourself who you like most and who is the most aligned with your principles and ideas.

 

[dburkhead]

I honestly can't say that G.H.W. Bush would have been any better than Clinton as he had some really pathetic ideas just like Clinton.

"He had some really pathetic ideas just like Clinton" != "as bad as Clinton.

I've known G.H.W. Bush as President and I've known Bill Clinton as President. Bush, for all his flaws, had numerous advantages over Clinton. From what I can see, Clinton had one over Bush: had Bush been in office we might not have had the "Republican Revolution" in 1994. OTOH, the years since then have so frittered that away that I'm dubious that it's much of an advantage at all.

It's really exasperating to see people point out one politicians flaws and use that to claim that he or she is "just as bad" as some other politician. Almost as exasperating as folk sneering at "better than we have now but acheivable" (with the idea of repeating again next go around and being in for the long haul) instead of "find the perfect politician even if he or she hasn't got a prayer of winning."

Back on topic....

It looks like you have to decide what element of liberty you have to give up with each of the big 3 in the Republican race.

Coats is anti-gun, Hostettler is anti-privacy, Stutzman is into globalization(UN)

When May 4th gets here you have to decide for yourself who you like most and who is the most aligned with your principles and ideas.

Not quite. You have to decide who you most want to put into office, and who you most want to keep out of office.. Your vote will help put somebody into office. It may not be the person you vote for.

Now, the splitting the vote idea can work both ways. Had Nader and his Green party not been in the race in 2000 it would have been President Al Gore who responded to 9/11 rather than Bush II. Now, one may consider Bush's response flawed--I do--but I am quite confident that Gore's would have been an unmitigated disaster.

What we ought to do is get onto left-leaning boards and start trumpeting Socialist and Green party candidates.

 

[dross]

"

It's really exasperating to see people point out one politicians flaws and use that to claim that he or she is "just as bad" as some other politician.

Yes, this is most annoying.

Politician A is not perfect, and Politician B is not perfect, therefore Politican A and Politician B are equally bad.

With this method of "analysis" we can equate Hitler, Stalin, and George Washington.

"
What we ought to do is get onto left-leaning boards and start trumpeting Socialist and Green party candidates.

I think you are quite seriously on to something here. Some of the good writers on the right should frequent left wing blogs and attack Obama from the left. In fact, I think I just found a new hobby. Writing is most fun when it's an exercise rather than an expression of belief.

 

[E5RANGER375]

So Hostettler is tied into the Patriot Act, Stutzman is opposed to subsidies but has no problem taking them, Coats is all for gun control. Now there are good thinks these guys have done and more bad things IM POSITIVE. They are part of the system that we are trying to kill. So where is any dirt on Behney or Bates where are some horrible laws they have supported where are the good laws they have wrote and/or voted for? Im just sayin there are other out there that have not been in the system its a perfect time to get fresh blood in there and hold their feet to the fire this time around.

maybe its just me, but he seems like that weird neighbor you never want your kids to go around. he just strikes me as a little nut jobbish. i mean its great that he knows and wants to vote strickliy for the constitution, but if hes the only one who votes for something then what good has it done to send him there? with Hostetler, i might not agree with him 100% but i do feel he will deffend the constitution, and if we get him to win the primaries and then the senate race, he will be powerful and a force to be listened o when he speaks just simply by the large numbers of votes he will recieve. but we all need to bond together and elect him in the primary.

 

[T-rav]

maybe its just me, but he seems like that weird neighbor you never want your kids to go around. he just strikes me as a little nut jobbish. i mean its great that he knows and wants to vote strickliy for the constitution, but if hes the only one who votes for something then what good has it done to send him there? with Hostetler, i might not agree with him 100% but i do feel he will deffend the constitution, and if we get him to win the primaries and then the senate race, he will be powerful and a force to be listened o when he speaks just simply by the large numbers of votes he will recieve. but we all need to bond together and elect him in the primary.

Its more of that borderline between nut jobbish and passionate maybe. Maybe you can help me understand this since you seem to be able to talk normally without demanding my vote. Whats the difference between sending one man with experience voting strictly by The Constitution and sending a man with out experience? I havent been at this politics thing very long so hopefully I can learn something.

 

[IndyBeerman]

Its more of that borderline between nut jobbish and passionate maybe. Maybe you can help me understand this since you seem to be able to talk normally without demanding my vote. Whats the difference between sending one man with experience voting strictly by The Constitution and sending a man with out experience? I havent been at this politics thing very long so hopefully I can learn something.

Hostettler has instant credibility and reputation and will not have to spend his two years in office trying so sway.

Credibility and reputation helps immensely and will help him get on decent committee, someone with no experiance, credibility and reputation will get them on the bottom of the barrel.


Picking the right candidate for office is like playing poker.
You got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them and know when to walk away.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Its more of that borderline between nut jobbish and passionate maybe. Maybe you can help me understand this since you seem to be able to talk normally without demanding my vote. Whats the difference between sending one man with experience voting strictly by The Constitution and sending a man with out experience? I havent been at this politics thing very long so hopefully I can learn something.

him knowing the ropes deffinetly helps him get a running start. in all honesty a NEW freshman congressman spends almost his whole first term just learning the ropes. a new freshman senator takes almost a full 2 years to get familiar. John knows what to do. so i want hostetler to start kicking azz as soon as hes sworn in. which he will do. he is very respected by the closet constitutionalist (politicians who are afraid to publicly voice their party opposition, but if they find someone strong to follow they will vote with them) thats what John Hostetler will be, A LEADER not a follower. he is the leader that other freshman congressmen and senators will follow and start changing things. i think a lot of these people know that after this november if they vote only along party lines they will be looking for new jobs in 2 or 6 years.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Hostettler has instant credibility and reputation and will not have to spend his two years in office trying so sway.

Credibility and reputation helps immensely and will help him get on decent committee, someone with no experiance, credibility and reputation will get them on the bottom of the barrel.


Picking the right candidate for office is like playing poker.
You got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them and know when to walk away.

 

[SavageEagle]

So Hostettler is tied into the Patriot Act, Stutzman is opposed to subsidies but has no problem taking them, Coats is all for gun control. Now there are good thinks these guys have done and more bad things IM POSITIVE. They are part of the system that we are trying to kill. So where is any dirt on Behney or Bates where are some horrible laws they have supported where are the good laws they have wrote and/or voted for? Im just sayin there are other out there that have not been in the system its a perfect time to get fresh blood in there and hold their feet to the fire this time around.

Stop talking with some sense. It's going to unravel the whole thread!

Good post.

I had this same argument with my best friend last night, a vote for someone not capable of winning the primary will enable someone to win that we don't want to.

Yes, exactly. I don't WANT any of the others to win. I want NEW BLOOD. That's why Behney gets my vote. I don't WANT him to "learn the ropes" when he gets there. I want him to CUT THROUGH the ropes. I want Washington to do a complete 180 and start cutting out laws, not writing more. I don't want to see political backdoor deals. I want transparency.



You vote for any politician than those who HAVEN'T been there, you're voting for more of the same. Period. I can't believe you guys can't see that. If you do see it, but don't see Behney or Bates winning, get out there and help him win. I spread the word about Behney to everyone I can. It's a shame more people will not.

 

[dburkhead]

You vote for any politician than those who HAVEN'T been there, you're voting for more of the same. Period. I can't believe you guys can't see that. If you do see it, but don't see Behney or Bates winning, get out there and help him win. I spread the word about Behney to everyone I can. It's a shame more people will not.

"More of the same." So Ronald Reagan was the same as Jimmy Carter? Eisenhower was the same as FDR was the same as career politician Thomas Jefferson?

Also, "new blood" is not a guarantee of "better." If there's one thing anyone who follows politics should know it's that it's the easiest thing in the world to claim to support whatever cause one believes will get one elected and then turn around and do something else once in office. I'm not saying that Behney will be like that but if you can't even consider the possibility then there's not much I can do about such naivete.

Also, as has been pointed out, even if the "new blood" is everything proponents claim, getting anything accomplished in Washington requires getting agreement from a great many people. Committee assignments are crucial to influencing what legislation even reaches the floor for vote. The abilities to deal effectively with these issues are learned skills. It takes time to acquire those skills. By the time one is able to have any kind of effective influence in Washington, one is no longer "new blood."

As for "get out there and help him win" the primary is May 4. You have six days. Six days. In all the time folk have been flacking for Behney here how many have they convinced that he 1) can get the job and 2) can do the job in a credible fashion? Even if you somehow convinced every individual on INGO to vote for Behney, he's so far behind that it wouldn't matter one bit. He is not going to be the Republican candidate. He is not going to be the Senator. And there's nothing anyone can do to change that at this point.

 

[Truckerman79]

John Hostettler wins the INGO straw poll in a landslide.