Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
hunstman supports the DREAM act and is a "globalist" type, so no way for me. it would be like the republicans picking mccain all over again, no thanks.
ron paul first.
a few of the republicans are a little too cozy with foreign aid for me (and also too cozy with the idea of a war for israel).
i heard (have no idea whether it is true or not) that trump would consider an independent run if he didn't care for the republican candidate, so would like to see how that sorts out.
i would love a 3 party option, unless the republican candidate is ron paul.
[MOD CUT]
Last edited by Ibginnie; 08-11-2011 at 08:03 PM..
Reason: off topic
My vote is based only on the candidate's resume and electability. First of all, Paul, Bachman and Palin are not electable. Obama's dream would be for one of them to get nominated. So the serious candidates are Romney, Perry and Pawlenty. I then look at EXECUTIVE experience. All 3 of them have some but Perry and Romney have the most. Perry's has mostly been as Governor for 11 years while Romney offers a more balanced resume of leadership in both the private and public sectors. Perry does have a better record as Governor of a state that has created thousands of new jobs while the rest of the county lost millions. But Perry has other problems including his public religious dogma and his terrible academic record in college. Romney is largely free of that. So that is why I chose Romney although I do think the nominee will be Perry. I don't agree with Romney on everything but the goal here has to be to retire Obama and save the country from 4 more years of leaderless leadership.
My vote is based only on the candidate's resume and electability. First of all, Paul, Bachman and Palin are not electable. Obama's dream would be for one of them to get nominated. So the serious candidates are Romney, Perry and Pawlenty. I then look at EXECUTIVE experience. All 3 of them have some but Perry and Romney have the most. Perry's has mostly been as Governor for 11 years while Romney offers a more balanced resume of leadership in both the private and public sectors. Perry does have a better record as Governor of a state that has created thousands of new jobs while the rest of the county lost millions. But Perry has other problems including his public religious dogma and his terrible academic record in college. Romney is largely free of that. So that is why I chose Romney although I do think the nominee will be Perry. I don't agree with Romney on everything but the goal here has to be to retire Obama and save the country from 4 more years of leaderless leadership.
i am tired of hearing who is and isn't electable-how can anyone possibly know the answer to that?
it's not just winning the primary, but winning the election. there are more registered democrats than republicans and there are plenty of independent voters. ron paul's antiwar/anti foreign aid position pleases both the young idealists and the fiscally responsible, a position that i am not sure that anyone else is actually willing to stand up for. obama is certainly pro war and many republicans are as well. who else has consistently concentrated on the welfare of AMERICAN citizens first?
there are plenty of voters (in both parties) who are FED UP with the out of control actions of the federal reserve -the manipulation of their money, and the degrading of their currency.how can a citizen's earning power even keep up with the federal reserve actions? they can wipe away anyone's earning gains with debt monetization and inflation.
ron paul is also one of the only (if not the only) candidate to speak out in behalf of the citizens when HE OPPOSED THE BANKSTER BAILOUTS. he also pushed for an audit of the federal reserve when no one else had the courage or the will to do it. the federal reserve STILL won't say what happened to the airlifted iraq money, or how much was lost.
he also stands against massive unchecked illegal immigration, and what it has done in terms of the cost of social services and the increasing unemployment. who else is standing up in this country on that subject? they are often going in the OTHER direction-with citizenship demands and free education for all.
he opposed obamacare and came up with his own plan, which (at least to me) certainly is a heck of lot better than forced mandatory health insurance purchase.
i remember it was said that a republican could never win ted kennedy's seat and the voters proved them wrong in a heavily democratic state. they ignored the media and went ahead and elected scott brown, and that, to me, showed that anything is possible in an election and, therefore,
real change is possible.
Last edited by floridasandy; 08-11-2011 at 06:22 PM..
i am tired of hearing who is and isn't electable-how can anyone possibly know the answer to that?
it's not just winning the primary, but winning the election. there are more registered democrats than republicans and there are plenty of independent voters. ron paul's antiwar/anti foreign aid position pleases both the young idealists and the fiscally responsible, a position that i am not sure that anyone else is actually willing to stand up for. obama is certainly pro war and many republicans are as well. who else has consistently concentrated on the welfare of AMERICAN citizens first?
there are plenty of voters (in both parties) who are FED UP with the out of control actions of the federal reserve -the manipulation of their money, and the degrading of their currency.how can a citizen's earning power even keep up with the federal reserve actions? they can wipe away anyone's earning gains with debt monetization and inflation.
ron paul is also one of the only (if not the only) candidate to speak out in behalf of the citizens when HE OPPOSED THE BANKSTER BAILOUTS. he also pushed for an audit of the federal reserve when no one else had the courage or the will to do it. the federal reserve STILL won't say what happened to the airlifted iraq money, or how much was lost.
he also stands against massive unchecked illegal immigration, and what it has done in terms of the cost of social services and the increasing unemployment. who else is standing up in this country on that subject? they are often going in the OTHER direction-with citizenship demands and free education for all.
he opposed obamacare and came up with his own plan, which (at least to me) certainly is a heck of lot better than forced mandatory health insurance purchase.
i remember it was said that a republican could never win ted kennedy's seat and the voters proved them wrong in a heavily democratic state. they ignored the media and went ahead and elected scott brown, and that, to me, showed that anything is possible in an election and, therefore,
real change is possible.
Look, I agree with much of what Ron Paul says but he cannot be elected. The liberals might love his stances on war and marijuana but when he comes out against Social Security, Medicare and all the other things they hold dearly, Paul cannot be elected. The conservatives- at least the foreign interventionist internationalist won't vote for him and the liberals won't. That leaves a small base from which to choose from.
Look, I agree with much of what Ron Paul says but he cannot be elected. The liberals might love his stances on war and marijuana but when he comes out against Social Security, Medicare and all the other things they hold dearly, Paul cannot be elected. The conservatives- at least the foreign interventionist internationalist won't vote for him and the liberals won't. That leaves a small base from which to choose from.
Likely correct ... unfortunately. No one is willing to sacrifice the partisan talking points, so we will have another election in favor of one of the CFR approved and prefered candidates.
Look, I agree with much of what Ron Paul says but he cannot be elected. The liberals might love his stances on war and marijuana but when he comes out against Social Security, Medicare and all the other things they hold dearly, Paul cannot be elected. The conservatives- at least the foreign interventionist internationalist won't vote for him and the liberals won't. That leaves a small base from which to choose from.
Screw the liberals FACT more more people independent voters who will vote ron paul over everyone else.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
