Newt or Mitt if you had to decide.

[88GT]

I would write in Barney and Baby Bop

I think I hate you now.

The ATM is correct, and always dispenses reason.

How do you look beyond the four-year time frame in presidential politics?

 

[KLB]

Pro life
Pro gun
pro religious freedom
pro capitalism
Pro military
Pro constitution



When is the last time there was a democrat that fit that profile?

When was the last time a republican fit it? The last one pretty much excludes both sides.

 

[J_Wales]

When was the last time a republican fit it? The last one pretty much excludes both sides.

These traits are incompatible with the Democrat platform.

Indeed you are correct though. It has been long since the Republican party has embodied this list. It's been at least 30 years.

What many deem a rush to the middle is becoming a rush to the bottom.

 

[Joseph]

I'm a Paul guy but hopefully Romney, newt will send the swing vote right to Obama

 

[squirrelhntr]

T left with only Mitt or Newt, which would you support and why. Just curious.

Newt. BHO's secret assault against the 2nd amendment has to be stopped. Agree with many non voters if Paul don't make it, but can't take a chance like what happened with Ross Perot and WJC.

 

[24Carat]

I vote for what I believe in. Not for convenience.

I won't vote for some ****tard I can't stand just to vote against some other ****tard I also can't stand. You might as well ask me if I prefer to eat dog feces or cat feces.

If you're willing to eat cat feces just to avoid eating dog feces, have at it. Just don't ask me to join you at the table.

Then why even comment in this thread?

 

[Prometheus]

Then why even comment in this thread?

The question has more than 2 answers. None of the above is a valid answer.

The question is posed to Ron Paul supporters, thus his specific comment is quite appropriate.

Your comments are the useless ones in this thread.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

I think I hate you now.


How do you look beyond the four-year time frame in presidential politics?

By looking backwards (more than four years) one can see how we found ourselves in this position. Its a steady cycle of less and less constitutionaly restrained government. Devotion to voting along party lines, (democrat or republican) rather than voting for the man (or woman) has resulted in those partys monopolizing the system. All this while they both push for bigger government wielding more and more power over civil liberties and industry regulation. This has given way to croney capitalism and mild socialism.


They ask us to pick a poison-more croney capitalism with a little more socialism, or more socialism with a little more croney capitalism. All while mostly leaving in place the previous administrations policies. ("Gov bureau is the nerest thing we have to eternal life"--Ronald Reagan) Its the "ratchet effect". Either way, they continualy expand all the government and its power. If not your biggest fear this cycle, then maybe the next. But rest assured it is coming. The only way I see to change that is buy not accepting what we are force fed. Loosing the voter base may force partys to adapt. If they never have to adapt we will continue as we have been, along this road to hell that is paved with good intentions, four years at a time.

 

[tr1gg3r]

This is a simple question with a simple answer. Gary Johnson.

 

[24Carat]

The question has more than 2 answers. None of the above is a valid answer.

The question is posed to Ron Paul supporters, thus his specific comment is quite appropriate.

Your comments are the useless ones in this thread.

Didn't make a comment, asked a question.

 

[88GT]

By looking backwards (more than four years) one can see how we found ourselves in this position. Its a steady cycle of less and less constitutionaly restrained government. Devotion to voting along party lines, (democrat or republican) rather than voting for the man (or woman) has resulted in those partys monopolizing the system. All this while they both push for bigger government wielding more and more power over civil liberties and industry regulation. This has given way to croney capitalism and mild socialism.


They ask us to pick a poison-more croney capitalism with a little more socialism, or more socialism with a little more croney capitalism. All while mostly leaving in place the previous administrations policies. ("Gov bureau is the nerest thing we have to eternal life"--Ronald Reagan) Its the "ratchet effect". Either way, they continualy expand all the government and its power. If not your biggest fear this cycle, then maybe the next. But rest assured it is coming. The only way I see to change that is buy not accepting what we are force fed. Loosing the voter base may force partys to adapt. If they never have to adapt we will continue as we have been, along this road to hell that is paved with good intentions, four years at a time.

Yeah, yeah. I get all that. But you can't plan more than 4 years at a time in presidential politics because you don't have options for anything beyond the next four years. You only have options for the next four years. It doesn't matter what those options are--status quo or radically different change--you still only have options for the next four years.

 

[jbombelli]

Yeah, yeah. I get all that. But you can't plan more than 4 years at a time in presidential politics because you don't have options for anything beyond the next four years. You only have options for the next four years. It doesn't matter what those options are--status quo or radically different change--you still only have options for the next four years.

You have the option of moving the party to the right by voting accordingly (if enough people do that) to cost them elections, and making it plain to them that, in order to win, they'll need to put up more conservative candidates. This can take a bit of time - you can't turn a battleship on a dime.

 

[SirRealism]

You have the option of moving the party to the right by voting accordingly (if enough people do that) to cost them elections, and making it plain to them that, in order to win, they'll need to put up more conservative candidates. This can take a bit of time - you can't turn a battleship on a dime.

Yeah, I think the two parties take advantage of our 4-year memory. They create panic each election cycle, trying to convince us the only chance we have to right the ship is to compromise on this particular candidate -- in this particular election. A year later, regardless who won, we reset and move the goal forward, and await our next half-ass candidates. It seems to me the only thing we're showing the parties is that we will accept whomever they give us.

I can't continue to reward them for that.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Yeah, yeah. I get all that. But you can't plan more than 4 years at a time in presidential politics because you don't have options for anything beyond the next four years. You only have options for the next four years. It doesn't matter what those options are--status quo or radically different change--you still only have options for the next four years.

Didnt a very smart man define insanity as..."Repeating the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result?"

 

[yotewacker]

Newt stood beside Peolsi on gun control and wanted the Brady ban to be permanent.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

If that was the choice, I'd either vote for a third party if it appears capable of achieving future public financing, or Obama so that we get a fresh set of choices in 2016. A Neocon is no better than an openly-communistic president.

 

[SirRealism]

Didnt a very smart man define insanity as..."Repeating the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result?"

Ironically, he kept telling people that, but nobody believed him

 

[Smokepole]

Same here! That "debate circus series" fit right in with the rest of the carrot/blinders "programing". you do not realise how obvious it is until you shut down your cable or satellite service like I did five years ago.

I feel the same way, but, There is no way that I won't vote against Obama this year. I don't care to end up with another 4 years of Obama. And if one doesn't actively do something to stop that possibility (by like voting) then that person has no reason or room to complain as our Liberties are eroded or taken away at the fastest pace in history. It could also be said that all those that didn't vote at all hold just as much responsibility as those that voted for Obama.

I have refrained from voting before because I didn't like the choices that I had. But I refuse to do that this time and have any part in allowing that Socialist Liberal dictator to have another shot subjugating the rest of us. I have said it before, I agree with Mark Levin in that I will vote for a dead can of Tuna before I will let Obama to stay in office. And I will work harder next time to see that we get a real conservative to vote for.

You may not like your choice (I know I don't), but if you don't vote and he gets in AGAIN, you will be part of the reason and will bear part of the responsibility of what happens for the next 4 years. And you will have NO basis to complain about ANYTHING that happens because you will have helped put him in office.

Not voting is just as bad as voting for him. It is 1/2 a vote in his favor.

Sorry, but I call 'em as I see 'em. There is MUCH more than just one's sensibilities and feeling at stake here. Voting for the Repub. candidate may just slow things down. But it will buy time to find another real conservative for the next time around. And you can't bank on getting ending up with a majority in both houses. The guy is already running around them now as it is. HE MUST BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE AND IF ALL STAY HOME HE IS BACK IN AND WILL MOVE AHEAD EVEN WITH BREAKNECK SPEED AND AUDACITY.

If you don't vote, don't you dare complain when he gets back in. EVER!!!

 

[rambone]

I have said it before, I agree with Mark Levin in that I will vote for a dead can of Tuna before I will let Obama to stay in office.

Mark Levin has only 2 choices on the ballot in the state of Virginia: Romney and Paul. Levin said he'd rather vote for Mitt Romney. A socialist, tax-raising, big-spending, bailout loving, crony-capitalist, gun-grabber... rather than the most constitutional candidate we've seen on a presidential ballot in decades.

I used to like Levin, read one of his books. But he's shown his true colors this cycle, pretty openly. He tears down Ron Paul daily, and props up/defends establishment losers.

 

[Smokepole]

Also, if Obama gets back in office and the Supreme's don't find against Obamacare it will likely NEVER be repealed since all of the parts will be in place and ingrained in our society for 3 to 4 years.

Also, if he is returned to office he will have the opportunities to place another one or two Kagan's or Sotomayor's to the SC bench. And with the DC and Chicago gun rights cases been won with a 5 to 4 decision as some other key decisions have been, do you REALLY think that we can live with that outcome?

There is a LOT more involved here that just "I don't like my choice" and I'm going to throw a tantrum and take my toys home.

FREEDOM AND THE CONSTITUTION ARE AT STAKE THIS YEAR. Like it or not.