Who will you vote for?

[Abysmul]

Online P.O.T.U.S. voting poll....
http://www.2008presidentialpoll.com/

RON PAUL BAY-BEE!

[YourAmishDaddy]

Ron Paul. Not a doubt in my mind.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Ron Paul. If he's not elected, it maybe time to dust off the old ammo box and do a little housecleaning. ;)

[Legend of Snuka]

Ron "F-n" Paul

[izzy izkowitz]

after research I am hopping on the Ron Paul bandwagon

[WhiskeyWhispers]

Where's Mickey Mouse in that poll ?

I know nothing about this Ron Paul guy, guess I'll have to look into him.

[bethm1b]

Ron Paul is so unpopular among politicians. He needs to be president!

[TrybalRage]

Do that :icon_mrgr

[Capt.Caveman]

Ron Paul is so unpopular among politicians. He needs to be president!

why?

i don't know of him but i'm an uninformed douche.


what r his policies on

imagration
terrorism
welfare

[B54]

why?

i don't know of him but i'm an uninformed douche.


what r his policies on

imagration
terrorism
welfare

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/

I'm writing in Lenin. As soon as he wins, he will rise.

[Capt.Caveman]

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/

I'm writing in Lenin. As soon as he wins, he will rise.

like what i read. get rid of everyone. he's my kind of guy

[Abysmul]

If this online poll is any indication of what real voters want, we will thankfully be seing Mr. Paul as our next president

[Glenn Dandy]

Should i get all fired up like i did with Ross Perot,,, just to reaLIZE OUR ELECTIONS ARE FIXED?


SO FAR HE SEEMS COOL... BUT HES KINDA PRO LIFE... WICH IS SILLY

[Newmania]

I vote the P.O.T.U.S. commercials go fuck themselves.

[Abysmul]

Should i get all fired up like i did with Ross Perot,,, just to reaLIZE OUR ELECTIONS ARE FIXED?


SO FAR HE SEEMS COOL... BUT HES KINDA PRO LIFE... WICH IS SILLY

He just wants the states to be able to decide whether abortion should be legal, nothing wrong with that

[Glenn Dandy]

His reasoning confused me... h said if you can prosecuit a man for a double homocide for a pregnant woman,,, then certainly you are saying the unborn child has rights...

wich i agree with... but my question is a legal one ... at what point does the law say a fetus is mature enough to be considered murderable? Is it the same as the legal cutoff for abortion?

theres also the thought that.. a mother decided to abort... a killer shouldnt have the same rights as a mother.


So far i like the cut of his Jib.... made him my myspace icon:)

[MrBogey]

I always favored Ron Paul. Though up till a few months ago when his supporters started coming out in droves. Man, they just accentuate his few ecentric ideals and chase away reasonable supporters.

[Glenn Dandy]

yeah, i was reading some myspace replies the anti war faggots are latching on.

[Abysmul]

yeah, i was reading some myspace replies the anti war faggots are latching on.
OH GOD they are:stomp:

[Glenn Dandy]

those asses,,,, he mostly commented on helping countrys that are despised ultimatly making them despise us... he didn,t mention jews directly,,,, but i was feelin him... they are such a bunch of distorted pricks... you could sell any anti war college puke a set of ecyclopediasif Lennon was on the cover.... and never heard a song from the guy.

[Sinn Fein]

Fred Thompson

[Abysmul]

Fred Thompson
Fixed that for you
:D

I re-fixed it. S.F.

[TrybalRage]

Fred Thompson


4 years ago, I would have agreed with you.

But I'm so disappointed with Bush, and I see Thompson as an extension of Bush policies. More big Gov, more picking fights with people I don't give a fuck about, lip service towards getting rid of gun laws, etc.

Thompson has ex-Bush people signing up to be his staff, and he was a corporate lobbyist before he was an actor - i.e. the fucking scumbags who ought to all be hung from their scrotums.

I think that people are so sick of the war, and the 'war on terror' anyone walking and talking tough about Iran is going to get their faces kicked in in a general election.

[Sam_Adams]

I wonder if Ron could run as VP of Fred Thompson. I like the smaller government Ron talks about but I don't think we should pull out our soldiers immediately. We definitely need to go, but we need to do it gradually.

And I like that Fred wants to stop playing around about the border policy and cut the mother fucker off.

[Southpaw]

Ron Paul and it isn't even close.

[YourAmishDaddy]

I wonder if Ron could run as VP of Fred Thompson. I like the smaller government Ron talks about but I don't think we should pull out our soldiers immediately. We definitely need to go, but we need to do it gradually.

And I like that Fred wants to stop playing around about the border policy and cut the mother fucker off.

Well we went in all at once, why not leave all at once? You don't correct mistakes gradually. If I'm accidentally beating my hand into a pulp trying to nail up something on a wall do i stop slowly?

I heard the news talking about it earlier today. "Oh there would be mass chaos and a civil war if we just left" Well what the hell is there now?

[Glenn Dandy]

If you just leave the savages would slaughter everyone that we asked to help and trust our boys...

bad idea ..

we need a police force there that can keep somekind of civility... or the chaos would be incredible.the rest of the world needs to step up.

they should do a third armed service called united nations international and make it a all voluntere force worldwide. Run it like a business.


the middle east isnt really our fucking problem... but those people need help.

[Sam_Adams]

Well we went in all at once, why not leave all at once? You don't correct mistakes gradually. If I'm accidentally beating my hand into a pulp trying to nail up something on a wall do i stop slowly?

I heard the news talking about it earlier today. "Oh there would be mass chaos and a civil war if we just left" Well what the hell is there now?

Would you slowly let your finger off of a rat trap so it will hold together or would you just pull off your finger quickly and risk upsetting the trap and breaking your finger?

[Xyn]

Ron Paul. No one else is even a second choice.

[Xyn]

Would you slowly let your finger off of a rat trap so it will hold together or would you just pull off your finger quickly and risk upsetting the trap and breaking your finger?

It's a fair point, except that I think the analogy would be more accurate if the rat trap had already sprung. If your hand is in a sprung rat trap, you're gonna get that thing off as soon as possible.

As far as Iraq, we already fucked that place up. Not saying we went in with bad intentions and not saying Saddam deserved anything less than he got, but the mere act of deposing him is the biggest reason that place is a mess.

We have failed to bring peace over several years and the experts all say that it would be a long time before we succeeded.

I say we pull out and see what happens. Either things settle down and they get their shit together, or it stays the same/gets worse.

The argument is that if Iraq stays the same or gets worse, we will just have to go back in anyways. Maybe, maybe not. Why not take a few years vacation from it? Maybe if they see that it's worse without us, more will welcome us back later.

It can't really hurt the situation much to leave. What it can do is save some soldiers lives and give our military a chance to heal. Give some of these soldiers the rest they deserve.

There is no logical sense in getting more soldiers killed just to justify the deaths of the ones who have died. They don't need justification. They died serving their country. Just the same as the soldiers who have died in all our past wars.

[YourAmishDaddy]

Iraq is Iraq's problem. We never should have been there in the first place, and to say we need to stay there to bring stability when nothing we've brought there has been close to stability is ridiculous.

Over 3,000 lives and closing in on a trillion dollars. It's time we end this mistake.

[MrBogey]

Look, everyone stop using analogies. Analogies are meant to make complicated concepts easier to grasp. Not equivocate so as to win an argument.

Pulling out quickly would be just like Somalia. How did that work for us?

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Looks like some people get it. (http://blog.ronpaul2008.com/ron_paul_2008/2007/07/press-release-r.html)

[ShiftyMH]

On the surface Ron Paul seems like a good candidate but the nutball sissies on the left love the guy for some reason and that turns me off to him.

[NoSurviivors]

I'm not sure yet at all, but what about Guliani?? I mean he's kind of against the grain enough to make some changes in DC. In a situation like NYC, he came off as a dickhead (yet rather sucessful) but that may be a good thing at this level of office.

I haven't really given this a whole lot of thought yet... Don't trust Hillary too much, & Obama just has the charisma.. that's it & all I have to say right now.

Guess I'll look deeper into Ron Paul.. haven't heard much on TV or in the papers about him. Not surprised.

[abudabit]

Everybody says Ron Paul yet he'll be lucky getting 2% of the votes.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Everybody says Ron Paul yet he'll be lucky getting 2% of the votes.

Don't be such a Negative Ned, sir.

Be a Positive Pete and push for Dr. Paul, spread the word, near and far to all.

[YourAmishDaddy]

Everybody says Ron Paul yet he'll be lucky getting 2% of the votes.

Which means what? I love ya bro but I've listened people who told me that too many times. I don't give a fuck if I'm the only person who votes for him and he just gets one vote. I'm done with it.

[krisko]

Mitt Romney is my guy. Ron Paul really pissed me off during the Republican debate when he suggested 9/11 was America's fault. I do like his border security ideas, and eminent domain stance. I hate abortion and think it is a sick practice (that is totally unfair if your a man) but I don't think that we can make it illegal again, we may be able to regulate it a little more (consent from a spouse/baby daddy or parent if under 16)...Where does the good Doctor stand on gay marriage?

[abudabit]

Which means what? I love ya bro but I've listened people who told me that too many times. I don't give a fuck if I'm the only person who votes for him and he just gets one vote. I'm done with it.

My point is either people are lying and don't really support Ron Paul offline, or libertarian types are lazy and don't vote.

[YourAmishDaddy]

Well if they do or don't it is what it is. But I need to finally vote my conscience. I listened to so many people before and look what I ended up with.

[TrybalRage]

Mitt Romney is my guy. Ron Paul really pissed me off during the Republican debate when he suggested 9/11 was America's fault. I do like his border security ideas, and eminent domain stance. I hate abortion and think it is a sick practice (that is totally unfair if your a man) but I don't think that we can make it illegal again, we may be able to regulate it a little more (consent from a spouse/baby daddy or parent if under 16)...Where does the good Doctor stand on gay marriage?

I have a deep hatred for the AWB-signing Romney. He and his superhero chin can go fuck themselves.

You have to step back a minute to understand what Paul was saying about 9/11 - actions have consequences. We have intervened many, many times in the middle east to secure the future availability of oil for this country. This has led to the public's support for complete whackjobs like Bin Laden. If we just leave these people alone then John Muhammed Public has no more reason to want to support extremists.

These views are backed by our own CIA and 9/11 report investigators. What, are they all full of shit?

No one says we deserved it, but we need to understand why - and it goes further than 'because we're free'.

As far as gay marriage, Paul thinks it is not a Federal issue, it's a State issue.

[Quexul]

My ideal presidential vote would be for Al Gore, and if he doesn't run (and he isn't yet), John Edwards. Both intelligent, experienced, progressive and electable. Not sure whom I'd prefer for vice president. Given this thread, I'm clearly in the minority here, but that's all right. :) {ProfJonathan, aka Quexul}

[krisko]

I have a deep hatred for the AWB-signing Romney. He and his superhero chin can go fuck themselves.

You have to step back a minute to understand what Paul was saying about 9/11 - actions have consequences. We have intervened many, many times in the middle east to secure the future availability of oil for this country. This has led to the public's support for complete whackjobs like Bin Laden. If we just leave these people alone then John Muhammed Public has no more reason to want to support extremists.

These views are backed by our own CIA and 9/11 report investigators. What, are they all full of shit?

No one says we deserved it, but we need to understand why - and it goes further than 'because we're free'.

As far as gay marriage, Paul thinks it is not a Federal issue, it's a State issue.

I have a question about why Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination? Why not run as an independent, he would most certainly fuck everythign up for the republicans (some of whom support a war that he doesn't) and would help democrats who do no support the war at all.

and....Muslim extremists believe that we are infidels, because of our religion (don't go crazy about that but a majority of Americans are Christian) and they hate our culture, are you suggesting that we alter our lifestyle to pander to a bunch of fanatics? Denying that those two things have an impact on the extremists is being dishonest. Also, we can't just leave anythign alone, if we dont' do anything (Sudan) we are monsters and if we do intervene we are putting our nose where it doesn't belong (Iraq)...so basically we're screwed

[abudabit]

Well if they do or don't it is what it is. But I need to finally vote my conscience. I listened to so many people before and look what I ended up with.

I agree, you are definitely doing the right thing, I just it were easier to get out the vote for liberty.

[Larz]

Ron Paul=Cindy Shehan

[BravoSierra]

I'm just not gonna vote this time around. If I did, I'd go for Rudy. Why? Because my favorite cat who has since died was named Rudy. I'd vote for him in honor of my dead kitty. Fuck politics.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Ron Paul=Cindy Shehan

What an ignorant ass.

[Larz]

What an ignorant ass.

Explain how they differ on the war, or even foreign policy for that matter.

Thats right. No fucking difference except that he's a cunt M.D. and she's just a cunt.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

Dr. Ron Paul is an elected Representative who understands the limitations of our form of government. That's more then can be said about your knowledge of government or history for that matter.

[Sinn Fein]

If Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination (which he won't), and then decides to run as an independent, enough dummies will vote for him that Hillary will end up getting elected. Just like in '92 when Ross Perot took enough votes away from Bush Senior, allowing Slick Willie to get in there.

[Larz]

Dr. Ron Paul is an elected Representative who understands the limitations of our form of government. That's more then can be said about your knowledge of government or history for that matter.

In other words, when it comes to explaining the difference between Ron Paul's position on Iraq and Cindy Sheehan's... ya got nuthin. Ok.

[abudabit]

If Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination (which he won't), and then decides to run as an independent, enough dummies will vote for him that Hillary will end up getting elected. Just like in '92 when Ross Perot took enough votes away from Bush Senior, allowing Slick Willie to get in there.

Fine with me, as much as I despise Hillary, the republican party needs to return to its abandoned limited government stance.

[HerkyJerkyLiz]

If Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination (which he won't), and then decides to run as an independent, enough dummies will vote for him that Hillary will end up getting elected. Just like in '92 when Ross Perot took enough votes away from Bush Senior, allowing Slick Willie to get in there.

agreed. i like ron paul stances on quite a few things but i think voting for him will be like voting for nader. wasted. i havent decided if i plan on voting next election. ill be in FL like i was last election and my vote more than likely will do nothing. again.

[Sinn Fein]

I agree, the Republican party hasn't seen greatness since the days of this fine man:

http://www.poster.net/reagan-ronald/reagan-ronald-photo-xl-ronald-reagan-6234801.jpg

So far, I like Fred Thompson. But, that could change.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

In other words, when it comes to explaining the difference between Ron Paul's position on Iraq and Cindy Sheehan's... ya got nuthin. Ok.

You really should read or listen to the man instead of forming your opinions on fifteen second sound bites.

agreed. i like ron paul stances on quite a few things but i think voting for him will be like voting for nader. wasted. i havent decided if i plan on voting next election. ill be in FL like i was last election and my vote will more than likely will do nothing. again.

A vote for the lesser of two evils, is still a vote for evil.

[YourAmishDaddy]

Yawns.. "Well you know what's gonna happen, people are gonna vote for him and we're gonna end up with hillary.." And before it was the same, and before, and before, and before. A group of people who can never give you a reason to vote for them, just against the other guy.

Fuck the republican party. The only difference between a Hillary president and this sack of cunt in office now is Hillary has more facial hair and bigger balls.

Everytime they play this psychological bullshit. Scaring you into going against your better judgement. Then when you succumb to it and vote for the asshole they don't know you anymore.

They act as if the votes belong to them, and someone else in the race is taking their votes away from them. A bunch on entitled assholes. Who have been in power so long they're useless.

[LiddyRules]

It's too early to tell. I'm a Dr. Ron Paul fan but if he doesn't make it, none of the other choices appeal to me and both parties suck. The difference is that Democrats will still try to ride the "George W. Bush is stupid" train (esp. if they likely choose idealess people Hilary or Obama) like they did in 2004 and 2006. Republicans are the ones most likely to learn from mistakes, know how to manipulate the system yet again and play the game better than the Democrats could ever dream of.

[Larz]

You really should read or listen to the man instead of forming your opinions on fifteen second sound bites.


I've read enough on his ideas about isolationist foreign policy, military retreat, and cutting defense spending accross the board. He's in lockstep with the the far-left on the most important security issues facing this country. Thats why so many liberals are jizzing all over themselves suppoting him.

Even hillary is to the right of Ron Paul.

[Vyce]

*sigh* More of this Ron Paul horseshit.

Rudy, if he gets the nomination. If not him, I guess Fred Thompson.

Not a single goddamn Democrat will get my vote. Fuck the lot of them.

[HerkyJerkyLiz]

Not a single goddamn Democrat will get my vote. Fuck the lot of them.

this is exactly whats wrong with people. so many people are stuck in this mold of im a democrat or im a republican so thats where my vote has to go instead of looking at candidates for what they individually represent. the chances of agreeing with any one person on ALL of their issue stances is more than likely not going to happen so you go with the one that most closely represents what youre looking for in a candidate regarless of party affiliation.

im a registered democrat mainly because most things important to me tend to fall on the left instead of the right but i dont limit myself to voting democratic because thats what my voter card says. i do my research on both sides and then pick the person that most closely represents what im looking for whether he be democrat or republican. and i say he because women have no business running for presidency. get in the white house kitchen and make some dinner like a good wife should. sorry womens lib gals.. i just dont agree with this 'women can do anything men can do' horse shit.

[YourAmishDaddy]

Exactly. I despise the democrat party. And I can't stand the GOP with a passion. Ron Paul is running under the GOP label. Right now anyway. And he's my guy. Too many people are either too lazy, or too stubborn to get out of that stupid mold of right vs left that is so old.

There is no left vs right anymore. It's whichever group of interests are greasing the pockets of said politicians. And I'm done with every single one of them.

I'm tired of big government types, I'm sick of authoritarian gasbags acting like they can take care of me, I'm sick of people giving lip service to Reagan but will go along with any big spending big government loser that has an R by their names.

I want to be left alone by government. I want to be left to do my own thing, in my own little space in life and not be babied and told I need some rim glassed wearing bureaucrat to get to the next day.

[bethm1b]

On the surface Ron Paul seems like a good candidate but the nutball sissies on the left love the guy for some reason and that turns me off to him.

So if some nutjob sissies listen to O&A you'd stop listening?

[YourAmishDaddy]

And that's the next phase. Calling people nuts, wackjobs, kooks, loons etc....

[abudabit]

I didn't realize supporting limited government made you a nut job leftwing sissy. If it does, I'm glad to be a nut job leftwing sissy alongside the founding fathers.

Dr. Paul is a staunch defender of one's natural right to self defense, a proponent of individual Second Amendment rights and is the only 2008 Presidential candidate with a voting record rated A+ by Gun Owners of America.

Paul has been named "The Taxpayer's Best Friend" by the National Taxpayers Union every year he has been in Congress, indicating a fiscal conservative voting record on spending of taxpayer dollars.

What a leftwinger.

[Southpaw]

I have a question about why Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination?



It's a smart move on his part because it gets him exposure in the debates which in turn helps fundraising. His anti-imperialism stance is a minority view in the GOP to be sure, but it wasn't always this way and with the way the war has been going his position will likely continue to gain traction. By the time the base decides to vote for the Mayor of 9/11, Mulitiple Choice Mitt, or TV's Fred Thompson, Dr. Paul will have much more momentum to go independent than he would have otherwise.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

If you want a president who, as a Representative, voted against the Patriot Act, against NAFTA, against CAFTA, against warrantless wiretaps, against funding the U.N., against the AWB, against the Iraq war, against the ballooning budget, against the DHS, is against the IRS, against the federal reserve, against illegal aliens, is against overpowering federal government, is for State rights, and is for individual freedoms........there is only one choice. If that is not what you want to see for our nation, vote for someone else. I'm voting for Ron Paul.

That's just crazy, nuts, insane! :icon_lol:

[Glenn Dandy]

I hate how easily people act like mice.


Ohh, i cant vote for a third party candidate cause it will mess up the balance and hilary will win....

just vote for who you like......people like that overthinking their bounds its why its fucked in the first place.


secondly i dont understand the electoral college or whatever the fuck it is... votes should be counted as individuals... c, mon its 2007 we cant track individual voting?

i dont like it and it stinks..


I go back to Ross Perot... i was a service guy in those days i talked to mayby 15 customers a day... ya know what? 95% of them i directly spoke to about the election said. " YUP VOTIN FOR ROSS"

yet what did he get 13% of the vote? Get the fuck out of here with this fishy business of elections... election reform NOW~!

[krisko]

i agree with what everyone is saying, i probably wouldn't ever vote for a democratic candidate beacuse i don't agree with anything the democratic party platform and their candidates say. it is not because they are democrats but because of their views. likewise i wouldn't vote for john mccain or rudy giulliani because of their views. rudy is not conservative enough for me on social issues and mccain is a fuck-wad BCRA passing kiss ass.

[Sinn Fein]

i agree with what everyone is saying, i probably wouldn't ever vote for a democratic candidate beacuse i don't agree with anything the democratic party platform and their candidates say. it is not because they are democrats but because of their views. likewise i wouldn't vote for john mccain or rudy giulliani because of their views. rudy is not conservative enough for me on social issues and mccain is a fuck-wad BCRA passing kiss ass.

That's basically how I see it. But, I would take Giuliani or McCain over any of the Dems because they are at least on the same page as me with regard to some issues.

[Vyce]

this is exactly whats wrong with people. so many people are stuck in this mold of im a democrat or im a republican so thats where my vote has to go instead of looking at candidates for what they individually represent. the chances of agreeing with any one person on ALL of their issue stances is more than likely not going to happen so you go with the one that most closely represents what youre looking for in a candidate regarless of party affiliation.

im a registered democrat mainly because most things important to me tend to fall on the left instead of the right but i dont limit myself to voting democratic because thats what my voter card says. i do my research on both sides and then pick the person that most closely represents what im looking for whether he be democrat or republican.

A few things about me:

I'm not a registered Republican or Democrat. I'm an independent.

I've voted for both.

I'm socially liberal, conservative on issues of national security and foreign policy, sort of in the middle on economics.

I just tend to skew conservative, mainly because even though Republicans / conservatives can be real assholes, in the last decade or so I find Democrats / liberals to be the more out of touch DOUCHES, especially on issues of foreign policy & national security.

And this current crop of Democrats are about the worst I've seen in a long time. Let's be realistic, only Hillary or Obama have a real chance of winning the nomination - maybe Gore if he throws his hat in the ring. And I hate all three of them.

Mark Warner would have been the best choice for the Democrats, but he unfortunately decided not to run. I have little use for any of the other contenders. I have little use for any of the GOP contenders, either, except for Rudy, who most closely mirrors my beliefs, and maybe Thompson.

[HerkyJerkyLiz]

well thats basically what i was saying. it goes without saying that if youre a republican or democrat you will more than likely agree with more of the stances of someone "of your party." but i would never let affiliation rule out me voting for someone.

[YourAmishDaddy]

Well I'd love for people to post those beliefs. And we can see where they stand.

[LiddyRules]

Well I'd love for people to post those beliefs. And we can see where they stand. Multiple-choice poll of various issues?






I like polls




i know what i said

[YourAmishDaddy]

Sure, why not. I'd just love to know. It would be a learning experience.

[HerkyJerkyLiz]

A few things about me:

I'm not a registered Republican or Democrat. I'm an independent.

I've voted for both.

I'm socially liberal, conservative on issues of national security and foreign policy, sort of in the middle on economics.

I just tend to skew conservative, mainly because even though Republicans / conservatives can be real assholes, in the last decade or so I find Democrats / liberals to be the more out of touch DOUCHES, especially on issues of foreign policy & national security.

And this current crop of Democrats are about the worst I've seen in a long time. Let's be realistic, only Hillary or Obama have a real chance of winning the nomination - maybe Gore if he throws his hat in the ring. And I hate all three of them.

Mark Warner would have been the best choice for the Democrats, but he unfortunately decided not to run. I have little use for any of the other contenders. I have little use for any of the GOP contenders, either, except for Rudy, who most closely mirrors my beliefs, and maybe Thompson.

the way you came off in the other post was just sounded like you wouldnt vote for a democrat because theyre a democrat which is why i quoted your post. ive just known so many people that think like that and it drives me insane. its like, stop being a brainwashed idiot and think for yourself!! do your own research and stop listening to what people tell you you should be doing or stop blindly voting because you feel you need to stick with your party!!! :arrrh:

I like polls

hehe

[Abysmul]

Sure, why not. I'd just love to know. It would be a learning experience.

Well, get to it!
CHOP,CHOP!

[YourAmishDaddy]

Well, get to it!
CHOP,CHOP!

I thought Liddy was posting one. He has a better touch at it anyway. Plus everyone knows where I stand. And universally hate me for it.

[B54]

I'm a full fledged believer of Classical Republicanism, something rooted in the believe of Machiavelli and slightly Baron (although I disagree with a lot of his work). I'm a registered Republican and a Conservative, but what Conversativism is today is not what I believe. People don't even know what Conversativism is anymore, it's in fact less government controling your life, but with the evolution of Neo-Conversativism, there is nothing left of the Framers design as to how America should have been. Instead, it started with the Teapot Dome scandal and the Grant Administration. It actually began slighty earlier, but for the most part, there was a fairness in government. I believe this country only had one good President, G. Washington.

No candidate is fit for President as I see, because there is a complete dis-connection in government. The parties carry only to the extreme left or right and forget about the remaining 95% of middle America. Why do you think the turn-out in America is less than 50% year after year, yet in Italy, where turn-out is ~90%. It is because they have multiple candidates that actually fit what the people want, not an couple of extremists. Of course that isn't to say that they have the best system, I am simply saying they are more balanced as far as candidates go.

I do not vote for a Presidental candidate because honestly, who cares? The President doesn't affect me. You know who does actually have an impact on my life and my town? My city council, mayor, and state officials.

[LiddyRules]

The problem with a poll of this magnitude is that I don't want to hastily post a poll of issues and leave important ones off. So far I have Big v. Small Gov't; Abortions v. Babies; Gun Control v. No/Less Gun Control; Drugs; War in Iraq; and I don't even know how to begin to poll the Economy or Free Speech (which, while a political issue, is one few politicians will touch). And then there's the 15 choice limt.

[Vyce]

the way you came off in the other post was just sounded like you wouldnt vote for a democrat because theyre a democrat which is why i quoted your post. ive just known so many people that think like that and it drives me insane. its like, stop being a brainwashed idiot and think for yourself!! do your own research and stop listening to what people tell you you should be doing or stop blindly voting because you feel you need to stick with your party!!! :arrrh:
hehe


Well to be honest with you, since I was old enough to vote (around 1998), I haven't really found a Democrat I considered worthy of voting for, at anything other than a local level.

Gore in 2000, Kerry in 04? Clinton redux & Obama in 08? Fuck that shit.

[HerkyJerkyLiz]

I do not vote for a Presidental candidate because honestly, who cares?

no, you dont vote for a president because before this year you werent able to. ;)

[TrybalRage]

agreed. i like ron paul stances on quite a few things but i think voting for him will be like voting for nader. wasted. i havent decided if i plan on voting next election. ill be in FL like i was last election and my vote more than likely will do nothing. again.

Right now it's just an issue of the primaries. Nothing wrong with supporting him right now.

[TrybalRage]

I've read enough on his ideas about isolationist foreign policy, military retreat, and cutting defense spending accross the board. He's in lockstep with the the far-left on the most important security issues facing this country. Thats why so many liberals are jizzing all over themselves suppoting him.

Even hillary is to the right of Ron Paul.

He wants to end all forms of welfare, social security, and repeal gun control laws enacted since 1934. He wants to get the US out of the UN and kick those cocksuckers out of the country. He wants to enforce visas and is against amnesty for illegals, and wants to bring home the troops so that they can be deployed along OUR BORDER.

No defense and far left, huh? Far lefties don't like him. He wants to get rid of the nanny state they all yearn for.

[queeby]

He wants to end all forms of welfare, social security, and repeal gun control laws enacted since 1934. He wants to get the US out of the UN and kick those cocksuckers out of the country. He wants to enforce visas and is against amnesty for illegals, and wants to bring home the troops so that they can be deployed along OUR BORDER.

No defense and far left, huh? Far lefties don't like him. He wants to get rid of the nanny state they all yearn for.


I completley agree with you, I don't understand why people call Ron Paul far left. I am pretty left leaning, and there is not even a possibility that I am voting for Ron Paul. I like some of what he believes in (his stance on gun control, getting out of Iraq, and his stance on Free Speech) but as a person that is on the REAL left I feel like I would be going back on principles by voting for someone who would get rid of welfare completley, and would do NOTHING about healthcare.

I really don't think that people have any idea what is left and what is right anymore. ESPECIALLY Republicans. (and by that i mean Neocons)

[Vyce]

He wants to end all forms of welfare, social security, and repeal gun control laws enacted since 1934. He wants to get the US out of the UN and kick those cocksuckers out of the country. He wants to enforce visas and is against amnesty for illegals, and wants to bring home the troops so that they can be deployed along OUR BORDER.

No defense and far left, huh? Far lefties don't like him. He wants to get rid of the nanny state they all yearn for.

Far left, far right, it's the same fucking thing. His isolationist foreign policy alone is enough for me to label him a fucking moron, and a loon.

Also, getting rid of social security? Fuck you, Ron Paul. Maybe you have money you can leave me, so that I'll have something to fucking depend on when I retire. Cocksucker.

[Larz]

I completley agree with you, I don't understand why people call Ron Paul far left.


He's far left on defense issues especially defense spending. His foreign policy stance is to the left of most democrats.

The final nail in the coffin for me is his opposition to the death penalty. Anti-Death penalty candidates are just plain assholes. It's yet another idiotic position that Ron Paul supporters try to keep hush-hush.

[TrybalRage]

...I feel like I would be going back on principles by voting for someone who would get rid of welfare completley, and would do NOTHING about healthcare.

Since welfare was instituted in this country, the poverty rate has increased. I shouldn't have to pick up the slack for lazy fucks, and private charities can help the people who really need it.

Paul on healthcare:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul345.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul339.html
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=22

Far left, far right, it's the same fucking thing. His isolationist foreign policy alone is enough for me to label him a fucking moron, and a loon.

Also, getting rid of social security? Fuck you, Ron Paul. Maybe you have money you can leave me, so that I'll have something to fucking depend on when I retire. Cocksucker.

A moron and a loon to stop interfering with foreign governments and picking fights with people? How about China decides we are better off without our form of government and takes steps to change it? That ok?

Fuck social security. Robbing me of my money every pay and I'll never see it again. It's my money. If you can't take your cash and invest it for your future then FUCK YOU. Not my problem if you starve in your 70's. Fuck the middle man.

The final nail in the coffin for me is his opposition to the death penalty. Anti-Death penalty candidates are just plain assholes. It's yet another idiotic position that Ron Paul supporters try to keep hush-hush.

Nothing hush-hush about it. I don't agree with him on this issue, but when you look at the fucked up court system, and how many falsely convicted people there are, I can kind of understand. Paul doesn't believe the government should kill people. But look at it this way, Paul is the strongest 2nd amendment supporter running, and he supports your right to carry and defend yourself. Do your job, and the death penalty won't be an issue.

[Larz]

But look at it this way, Paul is the strongest 2nd amendment supporter running, and he supports your right to carry and defend yourself. Do your job, and the death penalty won't be an issue.

Tell that to the families of all the little kids that get abducted and slaughtered each year. On the other end of the spectrum how many cops are killed in the line of duty? They're all armed and fully capable of defending themselves.

Being pro-gun doesn't absolve Ron Paul of being Anti-Death penalty. They're 2 separate issues, one deals with self-defense and the other deals with Justice.

[TrybalRage]

Tell that to the families of all the little kids that get abducted and slaughtered each year. On the other end of the spectrum how many cops are killed in the line of duty? They're all armed and fully capable of defending themselves.

Being pro-gun doesn't absolve Ron Paul of being Anti-Death penalty. They're 2 separate issues, one deals with self-defense and the other deals with Justice.


Like I said, I disagree with him on this issue. ooooh. One out of many.

Let me see, how often do I disagree with the last guy I voted for...

[weakside]

Ron Paul is not dealing with reality. Almost every issue he takes a stance on seems to be for quote value rather than thinking about the impact of actually carrying out these polices:

1. He wants to bring our entire military home and make America an isolationist country.

The fact is for America to be successful we need to be involved in world politics, and sometimes that includes military intervention. We can’t stand on our own. Like it or not, we are the worlds police but because of that it not only helps us economically, but also politically. Not being involved would end up causing bigger problems in the future. This isn’t even theory as it has been proven throughout the world’s history. Imagine what a city would be like if the police only protected the police station. That city would be chaos. It will be that, or someone else steps up to the plate and takes over our power like perhaps China.

2. Wants to boot out all illegal immigrants and build a huge fence around our country.

This is a solution that your seven-year-old might suggest. The money saved from booting out all illegal aliens would not begin to compensate for the millions upon millions of dollars that we would lose, and I am not writing about that stupid fence. Our Agricultural industry would come to a grinding halt. Dairy and farming industries would crash. They could not compensate for the loss of workers. Crops and cows can’t wait, they need to be dealt with immediately. Farmers go under, truckers and transportation gets hurt along with grocery stores. That’s just the immediate impact on our economy. The end result is that America starts spending more to import what we lost, that is if we can make those deals seeing as how President Paul made us an isolationist country. Agriculture is perhaps the most important industry in our country and to make it work any plan we come up with we need Mexico’s buy-in. Sorry, but that is just reality.

3. Wants to end all welfare programs, including those for corporations.

I believe that we need to revise our welfare system, but going cold turkey is going hurt the elderly and children. It will also increase the crime rate. I would rather have a couple bucks be taken out of my paycheck than my TV being taken out of my house. Plus, some industries need help from time to time because in the larger scheme of things it helps our economy. For example, we can’t have our airline industry going under because business in this country would come to a grinding halt.


4. Is against abortion

I was going to leave this out as like the fact he is against the death penalty as it tends to fall more into the realm of opinion. But more unwanted pregnancies leads to increased poverty and an increased crime rate in the future. Not to mention all the doctors that will go to jail for performing the procedure anyway and hack-artists cutting up women in some self-made clinics. Anyway, we can’t go down the road of telling a woman what she can and can’t do with her body. This isn’t Afghanistan.


5. Wants to go back to the gold standard.

Every major economy in the world abandoned the gold standard because it did not provide the flexibility to help a country out of a recession. The vast majority of economists agree that this would be huge step backwards.

In a way it really doesn’t matter since this guy doesn’t have a chance to win but I am shocked he has any supporters with his nutty ideas.

[Treat_Yourself]

after research I am hopping on the Ron Paul bandwagon

Same here.

[Treat_Yourself]

Ron Paul is not dealing with reality. Almost every issue he takes a stance on seems to be for quote value rather than thinking about the impact of actually carrying out these polices:

1. He wants to bring our entire military home and make America an isolationist country.

The fact is for America to be successful we need to be involved in world politics, and sometimes that includes military intervention. We can’t stand on our own. Like it or not, we are the worlds police but because of that it not only helps us economically, but also politically. Not being involved would end up causing bigger problems in the future. This isn’t even theory as it has been proven throughout the world’s history. Imagine what a city would be like if the police only protected the police station. That city would be chaos. It will be that, or someone else steps up to the plate and takes over our power like perhaps China.

2. Wants to boot out all illegal immigrants and build a huge fence around our country.

This is a solution that your seven-year-old might suggest. The money saved from booting out all illegal aliens would not begin to compensate for the millions upon millions of dollars that we would lose, and I am not writing about that stupid fence. Our Agricultural industry would come to a grinding halt. Dairy and farming industries would crash. They could not compensate for the loss of workers. Crops and cows can’t wait, they need to be dealt with immediately. Farmers go under, truckers and transportation gets hurt along with grocery stores. That’s just the immediate impact on our economy. The end result is that America starts spending more to import what we lost, that is if we can make those deals seeing as how President Paul made us an isolationist country. Agriculture is perhaps the most important industry in our country and to make it work any plan we come up with we need Mexico’s buy-in. Sorry, but that is just reality.

3. Wants to end all welfare programs, including those for corporations.

I believe that we need to revise our welfare system, but going cold turkey is going hurt the elderly and children. It will also increase the crime rate. I would rather have a couple bucks be taken out of my paycheck than my TV being taken out of my house. Plus, some industries need help from time to time because in the larger scheme of things it helps our economy. For example, we can’t have our airline industry going under because business in this country would come to a grinding halt.


4. Is against abortion

I was going to leave this out as like the fact he is against the death penalty as it tends to fall more into the realm of opinion. But more unwanted pregnancies leads to increased poverty and an increased crime rate in the future. Not to mention all the doctors that will go to jail for performing the procedure anyway and hack-artists cutting up women in some self-made clinics. Anyway, we can’t go down the road of telling a woman what she can and can’t do with her body. This isn’t Afghanistan.


5. Wants to go back to the gold standard.

Every major economy in the world abandoned the gold standard because it did not provide the flexibility to help a country out of a recession. The vast majority of economists agree that this would be huge step backwards.

In a way it really doesn’t matter since this guy doesn’t have a chance to win but I am shocked he has any supporters with his nutty ideas.

Without a congress to support his wackier ideas he won't get them passed, but he might slow down the intrusive "big government" policies that both Republicans and Democrats seem to support nowadays, and it would scare the shit out of both parties to see that money doesn't guarantee victory in major election races. We need someone like Paul to shake things up.