For RP supporters

Would you hold your nose and vote for Huckabee or Thompson in the general election?

  • NO

    Votes: 21 32.3%

  • Maybe when confronted with the thought of HillBama in the White House

    Votes: 16 24.6%

  • YES

    Votes: 28 43.1%
  • Total voters
    65
  • Poll closed .
No, evil is evil, lesser or not.

The country is on a very bad course just read Pat Buchanan's latest book 'Day of Reckoning' he pretty much nails it.

The truth is the main candidates rarely mention any of the big issues more less a plan to solve them.

It really is not hard to see that whomever actually gets elected, besides RP, business as usual will continue.

I voted for the lesser evil twice, George Bush.

I don't know if I can do it again and vote for the Huckster.
 
I think Ron Paul's unwillingness to fight back in the war declared against us by the jihadists is insane, but I would vote for him if nominated because the dems would do that, plus raise may taxes, curtail my rights, and take us further down the road to socialism. RP supporters would rather see one of the dems get elected than vote for someone else they don't totally agree with. Is that what is meant by an "arrogant bunker mentality"?

Bush gave us Chief Justice John Roberts. Hillary would appoint Chelsea.
 
If Ron does not win the republican nomination, I'll vote for him as a third-party candidate. If he does not run as a third-party candidate, I'll vote for another third party or write-in somebody.

I will not vote for a "more of the same" republican or any of these insane democrats.

"But you will be wasting your vote" you say...

Nope. I will vote with my conscience and that is never a "wasted" vote. The only candidate who "can't win" is the one who's supporters desert him because of spineless fears that somebody worse may win if they don't switch sides.
Click to expand...


+1 I totally agree.

I would not vote for Huckabee or Thompson even if R.P. wasn't in the running, and it's certainly not because of an opinion they hold on a single issue such as 2nd amendment rights. I would rather write-in None of the above.

Dr. Paul will get my vote regardless of other factors.
 
Understanding third party bids...

For those who advocate that voting for a third party candidate is effectively "throwing your vote away", or "enabling the opposition candidate"... take time to read (or at least skim) the online book: "Three's a Crowd (the dynamic of third parties) by Rapoport/Stone, 2005.

Preview here: http://books.google.com/books?id=hccTYGs99RoC&dq="contract+with+america"+"ross+perot"

Thesis is that the impact of third party bids, on the electoral process, extends long after that party has dried up and blown away.

OR

Staying true to one's ideals is not as pointless as the pragmatists will have you believe.
 
Evil is evil, lesser or not
Click to expand...
Correct. But instead of voting for the lesser of two, you vote for the lesser of three. Chances are the greater of the two original evils wins and you can thank your conscience for their victory. :eek:

A viable third party candidate in the form of a toned-down RP is the only chance for you conscience to make an impact.
 
Thesis is that the impact of third party bids, on the electoral process, extends long after that party has dried up and blown away.
Click to expand...
That's mighty fine. So when the inevitable process of equalization occurs in, say Australia, will they unmelt all the guns which were destroyed?
 
I am always floored when a supposed gun owner, pro freedom etc. says "I WON'T VOTE OR I WILL WRITE IN" or worse "I WILL VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT"!! The DEM'S love use we are willing to follow somebody who can't get elected or evan someone who hates the very thought of gun ownership! And you wonder why we loose our rights, it must be the smell of gunpowder!!:barf: We play " LETS MAKE A DEAL ", with our rights, we need to stand firm and say " NO " to any who stand against the ND amendment!:mad: Well I'm done for the week, good luck you get what you deserve in life!! Doc
 
Obama

For us, his problem is not what he believes, but what is important to him to achieve.

I view him at this point in time as a Cook County Hack. That means that he mouths King Daley's position. His level of commitment is not yet - and I emphasise YET - clear to the kind of laws that we think (at best) are stupid. There is no indication that he is an activist in the mold of DiFi, the Drunk, Banner Joe from DE, Swift Boat John, Chucky, McCarthy, etc.

Remember too that IF Heller goes our way as an Individual Right, he will be forced to annuciate in some detail what he thinks about it and its impact on policy. He can:
  1. Use it to say he agrees with the ruling, and thinks that it has established the need to move on to other methods of dealing with crime.
  2. Say nothing - which will be hard because he is a lawyer; the I support the Second Amendment bromide will not work for anybody then.
  3. Try to use it to galvinize the Brady Bunch/Elitest element as wedge issue - against the GOP.
Choice 2 (and especially 3) undermine his basic campaign positioning as trying to walk away from the political bitterness that we have been forced to be engaged in since Teddy/Dodd/Brady/Sugarman got loose on the country.

If 1 is his choice, we still can proceed to rip out the Second Set of Drinking Fountains, and get back to what the Founding Fathers conceptualized.

I - and I assume all of us - would rather move on. But if it remains a fight for freedom, we are in it - to quote Slick - until the last dog dies.
 
I watched the debate last night. I've watched the televised speeches on CSPAN. At this point, I am still 100% behind Ron Paul. I believe he is right. There is a lot of coincidence that terrorism against us did not start in earnest before Jimmy Carter, eased under Reagan, and expanded under Clinton. Their foriegn policies tend to lend themselves toward aggression. What if we weren't aggressive? What if those in the Middle East no longer saw us as the boogieman? I PERSONALLY don't believe a policy of carrot and stick will work long without drawing resentment.

The debate last night showed me just how arrogant Giullianni, Romney and Huckabee are. They're more than willing to pay for that arrogance with my child's blood. Hey- it's the patriotic thing to do? It shows support for our troops no? Of course to my knowlege, not one of them served. I don't know about Fred, and McCain at least can speak intelligently about being a troop though more of his time in the military was spent as a prisoner being tortured and deprived than in the rank and file.

We use too much carrot and too much stick. Why not just use a dollar?

Ron Paul looked very tired in the debate last night. Most of them did. Having heard Thompson at least mention the 10th amendment gave me some heart, and I would definately consider him as a second choice. I don't think the rest of the goof balls even read the constitution.

Oh- and laugh if you want when Dr. Paul brings up the ever shrinking dollar. Call him a kook and raise cain when you pay the extra at the pump and the extra everywhere else. Maybe we can go to war with somebody else because of their "gouging" prices on us rather than look at the Federal Reserve's gouging.
 
I voted yes but probably should have voted maybe. If Dr Paul doesn't get the nomination and doesn't run on the Libertarian ticket (which he says he won't) I would be willing to hold my nose and vote for Thompson (80%). I have reservations about Thompson (war) but he beats Clinton or Obama. I won't vote for Huckabee because I think his world view is twised by his religious beliefs. I won't vote for Romney or the Ghoul because of their lack of understanding in regards to the 2nd, I see no point in voting for a gungrabber just because they have an R after their name. The more I think about it the more sense L. Neil Smiths thoughts on voting make.
 
The DEM'S love use we are willing to follow somebody who can't get elected
Click to expand...

Well, ya know, if more of us would follow this person, HE COULD get elected.

Too many gun owners have it in their minds that they must do anything to keep a democrat from getting into office, even if it means voting for somone who isnt their perfered candidate, just because the numbers are in their favor. Thats not how a country should be run. :barf:

Elections should be about picking the candidate who will best run this country, not a nationwide game of "keep away" between two very corrupt teams. All voters in this country are adults. I think its high time we act like it.

I'm going to vote for the candidate that most closely supports my ideals and beleifs. That just happens to be Ron Paul. I'm tired of of having to choose between the rattler and the scorpion. If I have to write him in, I will. Will I win? No, I'm pretty sure I wont. But at least I'll know i folowed my heart.
 
Since the majority of Paul supporters will not vote for any other Republican, and since you non-Paul Republicans believe in voting the less of 2 evils, the answer is obvious. By your own reasoning a split Republican vote is bad, so QUIT SPLITTING THE VOTE. You believe in voting anyone but Dem, so to prevent a split, YOU MUST VOTE PAUL.

I know that you won't, so just quit telling me to abandon my principles and vote for the lesser of 2 evils, if you are not willing to do the same and vote for Paul to prevent a Dem president.
 
Speaking of polls, a while back some here made claims (offered bets) on what percent Paul would get. I seem to remember under 1, then later under 5.
To prevent me having to go back and search, would you "man up" and remind us of your dire predictions, in light of recent events. Thanks, I appreciate it.
 
Speaking of polls, a while back some here made claims offered bets) on what percent Paul would get. I seem to remember under 1, then later under 5.
Click to expand...

So do I miboso.

His detractors were constantly gloating that he was in single digits.

Well he is not now.

I know that you won't, so just quit telling me to abandon my principles and vote for the lesser of 2 evils, if you are not willing to do the same and vote for Paul to prevent a Dem president.
Click to expand...

Hear hear. Well said.
 
never
The problem with the GOP in the first place is "common sense compromises" on their total party platform.

The GOP now is into "worldcop" and "nationbuilding" (saving the world from itself) and Big Govt programs here at home.

As a Conservative.....I can not support that.

The party will get crushed in 2008
The party will learn the hard way about what it means to walk away from its limited Govt platform.
 
The party will get crushed in 2008
Click to expand...

Heheh...maybe...But you've proven that your ability to make political forecasts is a little, well, faulty. :D

You realize you just posted the same thing in 6 different threads?

This Ron Paul obsession of yours might be affecting your quality of life. Maybe you should take a little break.
 
tryin again

img.gif
 
A third party run by Ron Paul will be as disasterous for RKBA as any of Ralph Nadar's runs were for gun control.
Click to expand...
Then, I'd suggest you get behind Ron Paul's candidacy for the Republican nomination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top