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.
"You can see this in the conservative news media treating Perry like he is, as I keep calling him, the Second Coming of Reagan being dragged into the hectic race and playing the reluctant hero."
Well said! He barely made it official and already all polls are claiming Perry is #1 by a comfortable margin. I have a hard time believing any true conservative would back Perry knowing any of his history.
so I am guessing you believe all polls are bogus, is that true? If so, let's hear what you say when one comes out supporting your candidate...??
so I am guessing you believe all polls are bogus, is that true? If so, let's hear what you say when one comes out supporting your candidate...??
Not at all Nita. What I find surprising is that conservatives would be polled so quickly and vote pro Perry knowing his history.
Speaking for myself, I didn't like the fact Perry was a huge proponent of the NAFTA Super highway, a huge land grab through eminent domain in which Cintra, a Spanish Company, would run the tolls. Perry signed an executive order mandating women get the Gardisil HPV vaccine. He held off on allowing an anti-TSA vote until it would be impossible to pass. More recently he did send a letter to the Feds requesting reimbursement in the millions for incarceration of illegal aliens, that was positive.
I just don't like the fact he was a democrat until 1989 and he endorsed Al Gore in 1988 either. All this stuff is what surprises me that conservatives would put him in the number one spot in the polls so quickly after he announced.
But hey, I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and one of those who identify with the Tea Party and think our border should be protected rather than some other country, so you can't go by me.
Among the Republicans running for POTUS there is definitly a difference between them. Here is how I would categorize them.
Tea Party Candidates - Small govt., small taxes, states rights Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann
Neo-Cons - Basically George Bush - Big govt., Pro Intervention (Wars everywhere) - Unapologetic Israel supporters and Christian Fundamentalists. Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich
Libertarian - Ron Paul - You know what they believe
Ron Paul
Establishment - More of Paleo variety before George Bush - more like Reagan
Jon Huntsman, Mitt romney
Of the four. I would say Neo Cons are the worst. We have had enough war havn't we?
Neo-cons ARE establishment so are Neo-liberals. They are the same thing in fact.
Conservatives USED to be for small constitutional government; a strong military; low taxes; fiscal responsibility.
Liberals USED to be for Bigger Government; Higher taxes to pay for more government programs; PEACE
Now Neo-cons and Neo-Liberals, (who call themselves Republicans and Democrats but they aren't really but they are the "status quo" establishment types), as they should be called.... are BOTH for BIG GOVERNMENT; LOTS OF NATION BUILDING; LOTS OF WAR MONGERING including starting wars and killing innocent civilians; HIGHER TAXES; SUFFOCATING GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS OF SMALL BUSINESSES that inhibit expansion and job creation; GOVERNMENT & CORPORATE CONTROL (FASCIST) of the people; Ignoring the Constitution paying it lip service only; fiscal irresponsibility and increasing the debt and spending money we don't have.
The Neo-con candidates are: Bachman; Cain: Perry, Romney; Huntsman
The Neo-Liberal is: Obama
Conservative: Ron Paul, Gary Johnson
Liberal: Ralph Nader
Libertarian: Bob Barr (also conservative)
Green party: Cynthia McKinney
Constitution party: Chuck Baldwin (also conservative)
I personally think the government is way too big and bloated and has WAY TOO MUCH control. I think even the old fashioned liberals believe (like Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney) believe in the Constitution and they BELIEVE IN PEACE AND FREEDOM. So if you call yourself a Democrat and want to vote for someone other than Ron Paul (who I think everyone should be very happy with no matter WHICH party you affiliate with), vote for Ralph Nader or McKinney. At least they will also bring the troops home and won't start more wars.
If you consider yourself a Republican and a conservative but don't like Ron Paul for whatever inexplicable reason, then vote for Gary Johnson or even Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. There are lots of options.
Don't waste your vote on a status quo establishment candidate who will continue to trash our country and recklessly spend our money while sending us to the poor house as our currency continues to lose value. If you DO choose an establishment candidate and things get a lot worse and STAY a lot worse for decades, you'll have no one to blame but yourself. Vote for a non-warmongering candidate and at least YOU won't have been part of the problem by helping to put a Neo-Lib or a Neo-Con back in the White House.
Neo-cons ARE establishment so are Neo-liberals. They are the same thing in fact.
Conservatives USED to be for small constitutional government; a strong military; low taxes; fiscal responsibility.
Liberals USED to be for Bigger Government; Higher taxes to pay for more government programs; PEACE
Now Neo-cons and Neo-Liberals, (who call themselves Republicans and Democrats but they aren't really but they are the "status quo" establishment types), as they should be called.... are BOTH for BIG GOVERNMENT; LOTS OF NATION BUILDING; LOTS OF WAR MONGERING including starting wars and killing innocent civilians; HIGHER TAXES; SUFFOCATING GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS OF SMALL BUSINESSES that inhibit expansion and job creation; GOVERNMENT & CORPORATE CONTROL (FASCIST) of the people; Ignoring the Constitution paying it lip service only; fiscal irresponsibility and increasing the debt and spending money we don't have.
The Neo-con candidates are: Bachman; Cain: Perry, Romney; Huntsman
The Neo-Liberal is: Obama
Conservative: Ron Paul, Gary Johnson
Liberal: Ralph Nader
Libertarian: Bob Barr (also conservative)
Green party: Cynthia McKinney
Constitution party: Chuck Baldwin (also conservative)
I personally think the government is way too big and bloated and has WAY TOO MUCH control. I think even the old fashioned liberals believe (like Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney) believe in the Constitution and they BELIEVE IN PEACE AND FREEDOM. So if you call yourself a Democrat and want to vote for someone other than Ron Paul (who I think everyone should be very happy with no matter WHICH party you affiliate with), vote for Ralph Nader or McKinney. At least they will also bring the troops home and won't start more wars.
If you consider yourself a Republican and a conservative but don't like Ron Paul for whatever inexplicable reason, then vote for Gary Johnson or even Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. There are lots of options.
Don't waste your vote on a status quo establishment candidate who will continue to trash our country and recklessly spend our money while sending us to the poor house as our currency continues to lose value. If you DO choose an establishment candidate and things get a lot worse and STAY a lot worse for decades, you'll have no one to blame but yourself. Vote for a non-warmongering candidate and at least YOU won't have been part of the problem by helping to put a Neo-Lib or a Neo-Con back in the White House.
I don't pledge my allegiance to a platform. To me, the notion of being loyal to a single platform is pretty flawed, because no individual agrees with an entire platform. We are all individuals. For instance, when an individual buys into partisan politics, or left-right arguments, I sort of feel sorry for them, because their inspirations, mentors, and teachers have not helped them break away from this tool that ultimately divides like-minded beings. So to answer the question, I don't vote for a "type" of candidate, it's much deeper than that(at least to me.)
More than anything else, money is what puts someone in office. It is money that pays for the marketing of the candidate, (the clothes and style send subtle messages) and the advertisements send the big messages. It costs big bucks and if we're honest, people vote for those who do the best advertising themselves. This is why elections will almost always go to one of the the main parties, repub or democrat. That is where the money flows.
I always vote for the candidate that acts in accordance with what is best in the long run for the American people in the world arena. To me, working in harmony with our neighbors for the common good wins over domination and aggression every time.
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.
