Which Republican do you presently prefer for 2012?

Page 4 of 5 [ 66 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Which one do you prefer?

Newt Gingrich	5%	[ 2 ]
Mitt Romney	2%	[ 1 ]
Rick Perry	0%	[ 0 ]
Michele Bachmann	2%	[ 1 ]
Ron Paul	37%	[ 15 ]
Rick Santorum	0%	[ 0 ]
Jon Huntsman	7%	[ 3 ]
Elmer Fudd	2%	[ 1 ]
Inuyasha	22%	[ 9 ]
Other (specify)	2%	[ 1 ]
Just show the results	20%	[ 8 ]

Total votes : 41

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,995
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Dec 2011, 10:00 am

ruveyn wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

Well out of those I guess Ron Paul is the best option, but I would like him more if he was not a republican.....because as a rule politicians who support the Democratic Party or Republican party tend to be nothing more than corporate puppets.

If Ron Paul runs (doubtful that he will be nominated) he will be shredded in the general election.

ruveyn

Yes usually the best options are the least likely to get nominated when it comes to the scam that is our elections.

_________________
We won't go back.

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Dec 2011, 11:25 am

pandabear wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

last time they endorsed John McCain so keep that in mind when considering their credibility

John McCain did win the nomination.

So, I guess that the Wrong Planet poll shouldn't count either, because Ron Paul has more supporters than anyone else. If we discount the Ron Paul votes as spurious, then our clear winner is Inuyasha.

He finished 4th in Iowa however.

Saying Ron has no chance in the general is simply not based in reality. Paul has consistently polled better than his GOP counterparts against Obama. He is the only one that independents prefer to Obama and can also peel off democrat voters. If the GOP doesn't nominate Ron Paul, they will lose the general election.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

18 Dec 2011, 12:35 pm

Jacoby wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

last time they endorsed John McCain so keep that in mind when considering their credibility

What would be his appeal to Democratic voters? Remember: we are a bunch of Socialists who want a Nanny Government to take care of us from cradle to grave. Promising to get rid of Social Security, Medicare, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act isn't going to persuade us.

snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

18 Dec 2011, 1:20 pm

pandabear wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

last time they endorsed John McCain so keep that in mind when considering their credibility

I voted for Obama last election, this election I'm voting for Paul. He's appealing because he has the best complete message compared to the others. Paul isn't going to cut programs to the point that millions of families are going to be homeless.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

18 Dec 2011, 1:45 pm

snapcap wrote:

Paul isn't going to cut programs to the point that millions of families are going to be homeless.

How do you know this? Isn't it standard Libertarian theology that poor people don't matter, and shouldn't count for anything?

snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

18 Dec 2011, 1:56 pm

pandabear wrote:

snapcap wrote:

Paul isn't going to cut programs to the point that millions of families are going to be homeless.

How do you know this? Isn't it standard Libertarian theology that poor people don't matter, and shouldn't count for anything?

lol where did you hear that? I thought it was more like letting states and communities decide what to do with their welfare programs. If millions of families were about to go homeless, that would mean there would be millions of vacant homes, not making any money for the owners. Wouldn't it be safe to assume that rent would drop so not to lose the tenants?

dmm1010
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 253
Location: Salem, WI, US

18 Dec 2011, 2:03 pm

pandabear wrote:

How do you know this? Isn't it standard Libertarian theology that poor people don't matter, and shouldn't count for anything?

Absolutely. And, the society depicted in the novel "Brave New World" is an embodiment of standard Liberal "theology."

How about a little fire, Scarecrow?

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

18 Dec 2011, 2:35 pm

Well, to be fair, Mr. Paul does characterize Social Security and Medicare as both "unconstitutional" and comparable to slavery.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/ ... e-slavery/

snapcap
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

18 Dec 2011, 3:12 pm

He's also stated a plan to keep SS solvent by cutting spending.

Paul On SS

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Dec 2011, 3:53 pm

pandabear wrote:

Well, to be fair, Mr. Paul does characterize Social Security and Medicare as both "unconstitutional" and comparable to slavery.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/ ... e-slavery/

I think it's misleading to say simply say he's comparing it to slavery. He is saying that just because the Supreme Court has found Social Security constitutional, doesn't mean that it is right and is using slavery as an example of where the court was wrong.

But no, Ron isn't planning on getting rid of SS, Medicare, Medicaid, any of that and he probably couldn't even if he wanted to. It will take a fundamental change in how people view the role of government in their lives for that to happen. Unlike his predecessors, he will not rule by decree. The departments that he wants to close initially are plainly laid out in his budget plan. Ron's budget cuts are more pointed towards the the big corporations and ending our wars and meddling abroad.

As for why a normally Democratic voter might vote for Ron Paul? Ending the wars, protecting and restoring our civil liberties(they're not holding up too well under Obama), ending our unconstitutional and racist drug war, and ending corporate welfare. Ron should also be appealing as far as Republicans go since he won't impose his social views on the rest of the country. Another appealing is thing is knowing that even tho you may disagree with Ron; he isn't corrupt, he isn't beholden to any corporate interests. The same can not be said about our friend currently residing in the White House.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

18 Dec 2011, 6:17 pm

Here is the Libertarian platform

http://www.lp.org/platform

Quote:

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would
phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private
voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts
of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become more charitable and
civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.

Much too radical, even for Fox Noise.

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

18 Dec 2011, 6:35 pm

"Rudy Giuliani - for months the Republican Front runner, then people actually started voting." - Jon Stewart

Ron Paul will do well in straw polls but not so much in the primaries.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

dmm1010
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 253
Location: Salem, WI, US

18 Dec 2011, 6:48 pm

pandabear wrote:

Here is the Libertarian platform

http://www.lp.org/platform

Quote:

Much too radical, even for Fox Noise.

That's irrelevant because, to the best of my knowledge, Ron Paul isn't a member of the Libertarian Party.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,740
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2011, 7:29 pm

dmm1010 wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Here is the Libertarian platform

http://www.lp.org/platform

Quote:

Much too radical, even for Fox Noise.

That's irrelevant because, to the best of my knowledge, Ron Paul isn't a member of the Libertarian Party.

As I recall, he had run as the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate a few years ago.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

18 Dec 2011, 7:38 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

Quote:

1988 presidential campaign

Main article: Ron Paul presidential campaign, 1988

In the 1988 presidential election, Paul was on the ballot in 46 States as the Libertarian Party candidate.[42] Paul scored third in the popular vote with 432,179 votes (0.5%).[43] Paul was kept off the ballot in Missouri, and received votes there only when written in, due to what the St. Louis Post-Dispatch termed a "technicality".[44]

The Libertarian party was split between a Conservative and Liberal wing. Ron Paul represented the Conservative wing, which was successful in fundraising, while the Liberal wing claimed to have received ten times more (and more favorable) press coverage—which, some argued, was a hundred times more important. Nevertheless the nomination went to Paul. Ron Paul argued, "Pro-life libertarians have a vital task to perform: to persuade the many abortion-supporting libertarians of the contradiction between abortion and individual liberty; and to sever the mistaken connection in many minds between individual freedom and the 'right' to extinguish individual life."

dmm1010
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 253
Location: Salem, WI, US

18 Dec 2011, 8:08 pm

pandabear wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

Quote:

1988 presidential campaign

Main article: Ron Paul presidential campaign, 1988

In the 1988 presidential election, Paul was on the ballot in 46 States as the Libertarian Party candidate. [...]

Okay, in 1988 Ron Paul was the Libertarian presidential candidate. Good to know; thank you!

Now I personally see no problem with "phas[ing] out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition[ing] to a private voluntary system," provided that those who legitimately depend on the current system aren't left out in the cold so to speak. That said, you've yet to establish that Ron Paul wants to phase out Social Security. Was that part of the Libertarian platform in 1988? And more importantly, has Ron Paul indicated that eliminating Social Security is currently one of his goals?

Page 4 of 5 [ 66 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Jump to:

Which Republican do you presently prefer for 2012? Post Reply New Topic

Which Republican do you presently prefer for 2012?