I will not vote for Romney or Santorum if they manage to come away with the nomination. There is no real difference between them and Obama in the policies I care about. Santorum scares me the most out of the three. I will vote for a 3rd party candidate again if they are the choices from the party.
T.J. wrote: Santorum scares me the most out of the three. I will vote for a 3rd party candidate again if they are the choices from the party.
yup
"Don't pander to the pro-life vote" is an unfair charge against the Republican party by left-of-center folks.
I would bet that that 15% number earlier noted regarding people who would NEVER vote for someone who is not pro-life would be almost EXACTLY matched by a 15% or so number of people at the other end of the spectrum who would NEVER vote for someone who is not pro-choice.
How come we never hear "Don't pander to the pro-choice vote"?
AngryCorvair wrote: Ron Paul is currently 76 years old, yes? how many people won't vote for him because he's older than their grandpa, and could very well die in office?
That's not what the caucus vote showed.
Paul was heavily supported by young people.
I find this race interesting.
3 very different candidates. Very.
No one is saying enough about Ron Paul.
I find it extremely interesting that the heartland farming area strongly supported him. He's a little extreme for them.
I am assuming he can hold his own in NH. Santorum will nosedive. SC will be interesting.
If Paul can survive SC, he may gain some momentum.
In reply to SVreX:
That at least gives me a little hope for the future. The fact that old farmers and homophobic churchgoers voted the way they did is disappointing to me and shows me that they really haven't been paying attention for the past decade. The fact that voters under 30 really went hard for Ron Paul tells me that they get it and realize that we need change and not to just try to maintain the status quo like every other candidate that was on the ballot.
T.J. wrote: I will not vote for Romney or Santorum if they manage to come away with the nomination. There is no real difference between them and Obama in the policies I care about. Santorum scares me the most out of the three. I will vote for a 3rd party candidate again if they are the choices from the party.
+1 Wholeheartedly agree. Say what you will about Ron Paul but he's had a position and stuck with it. The others just seem like typical politicians who will say whatever they need to get the vote and then accomplish nothing.
I have a different view of Romney.
I don't think the religious right cares has issues with his Mormonism. They have TRUST issues with him.
He's not just a flipflopper. That would be easy.
He has been very strong and passionate on opposing sides of several big issues. He comes across as a traitor. Religious conservatives won't put up with that.
I don't think Romney can win nationally because he is just a vanilla Obama lite.
Paul could have more power in a national race than he is credited with.
1- Conservatives will happily vote against Obama regardless of who the Republican candidate is. No Republican candidate will win any Liberal votes, so they don't matter.
2- Independents are more likely to choose him in a race against Obama.
3- Libertarians would come out to vote for him in droves.
4- Young people like his positions, and feel betrayed by Obama.
5- There would be no mistaking him for Obama. Nobody could say things like "his healthcare plan is similar", or "he's another nation builder", or "his international policy is similar". He'd be a clear different choice.
6- I don't think he'd be another Ross Perot running as a Republican. He'd split the vote if he ran as an independent.
I think he'd be quite interesting.
neon4891 wrote:chuckles wrote:It all depends on Romney uniting the party. The Reps have been rather divided for the past 4 years, with a libertarian movement gaining ground. The only rallying cry they have for the whole party is simply "anti-Obama", will it be enough?N Sperlo wrote: I don't care to pay attention to the primaries anymore. Its a joke.Agreed. Still, I'm even more convinced Romney will be President.
doubt it ... like him or not, the one thing he's REALLY good at is campaigning
SVreX wrote: How come we never hear "Don't pander to the pro-choice vote"?
Because being pro-choice ALWAYS gives the option NOT to have an abortion.
SVreX wrote: 1- Conservatives will happily vote against Obama regardless of who the Republican candidate is. No Republican candidate will win any Liberal votes, so they don't matter.
Incorrect. I am quite liberal (socially) and I would vote for Johnson in a New York minute.
I hate the Republican party because they have married themselves to the religious right wing. If they could divorce themselves from that train wreck, they'd get a lot more votes from people like me: moderates who want both the government and the church to stay the berkeley out of my private life. Anyone who wants to combine religion and politics doesn't get my vote, so I'm stuck voting against people whose fiscal policies mirror my own desires.
Give me a viable third-party purple candidate and I'd start campaigning for them. If Johnson goes independent, I'll put my money where my mouth is.
Umm... Johnson is not running. I was referring to candidates.
Duke wrote:SVreX wrote: How come we never hear "Don't pander to the pro-choice vote"?Because being pro-choice ALWAYS gives the option NOT to have an abortion.
Maybe in theory, but not in practice. Any idea how many pregnant women are counseled that adoption is an option? How about honest information about the factual health risks of abortion? Ongoing emotional impact?
If tax dollars are involved as "health care", the option of not having an abortion is often treated like a religious viewpoint which can't be advocated.
It is theoretically always an option, but functionally can sometimes border on genocidal in it's implementation.
Lets not go here. Sorry I brought it up.
The caucus was amazing. Romney won by only 8 votes! 
I don't know nothin' about no votin' and presidentin', but I do know that intrade.com is my new favorite thing in the world. It reminds me of the last few minutes of Caddyshack where it was suddenly okay to bet on ANYTHING.
jg
Brett_Murphy wrote:SVreX wrote: 1- Conservatives will happily vote against Obama regardless of who the Republican candidate is. No Republican candidate will win any Liberal votes, so they don't matter.I *hate* the Republican party because they have married themselves to the religious right wing. If they could divorce themselves from that train wreck, they'd get a lot more votes from people like me: moderates who want both the government and the church to stay the berkeley out of my private life. Anyone who wants to combine religion and politics doesn't get my vote, so I'm stuck voting against people whose fiscal policies mirror my own desires.
Well put. +1
SvReX, do you have numbers to back up any of things you brought up? Or is it just grandstanding?
I'm going to back away from the abortion issue in this thread, but I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on your analysis, Paul.
In reply to z31maniac:
Opinion. All my opinion (based on inputs I've heard from others). Just like most everyone else here.
Unless you are referring to the abortion info. That's pretty solid, but I'm not going to flounder this further. Definitely not an issue I want to pursue.
Is there a particular reason that I should offer numbers to back up my opinion when others in this thread are not expected to?
I'd say the "homophobic churchgoers" thing was probably a bit more grandstanding, but I won't ask for numbers.
Duke wrote: I'm going to back away from the abortion issue in this thread, but I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on your analysis, Paul.
I respect that, and agree to disagree.
SVreX wrote: In reply to z31maniac: Opinion. All my opinion (based on inputs I've heard from others). Just like most everyone else here. Unless you are referring to the abortion info. That's pretty solid, but I'm not going to flounder this further. Definitely not an issue I want to pursue. Is there a particular reason that I should offer numbers to back up my opinion when others in this thread are not expected to? I'd say the "homophobic churchgoers" thing was probably a bit more grandstanding, but I won't ask for numbers.
Because you presented it as fact vs someone's opinion.
Really, what difference does it make who wins. We're screwed no matter what. They are all politicians, they are lying through their teeth to get a vote. Once in office, it will be business as usual. Besides, congress is still full of vermin. Somebody get the Raid.
Until honest to God statesmen get elected, we are just trading one worthless piece of crap for another. The best people for the job will never run for office. They aren't going to subject themselves or their families to the abuses of that nest of snakes.
Iowa is not that conservative anymore, I grew up there from when I was born in 1966 until the early 2000's. It went more liberal since then, they even have a same sex marriage law now unless its been changed again. Just like liberalism taxes are going up and cost of doing business has gone up. Romney winning Iowa just confirms that since he isnt known as a conservative.
I wont vote for Paul unless hes the only one left to get Obama out. His foreign policy is nonexistant. He says he wont go to war for any reason basically, wants to be isolationist which never works, ask Wilson and FDR how that worked out. Non of the candidates are that great, Gingrich is a flip flopper, he lost my support after doing the bs global warming ad with Pelosi.
I REFUSE to vote for anyone who is as social conservative as Santorum. I would vote for a libertarian though.
SVreX wrote: Paul could have more power in a national race than he is credited with. 1- Conservatives will happily vote against Obama regardless of who the Republican candidate is. No Republican candidate will win any Liberal votes, so they don't matter. 2- Independents are more likely to choose him in a race against Obama. 3- Libertarians would come out to vote for him in droves. 4- Young people like his positions, and feel betrayed by Obama. 5- There would be no mistaking him for Obama. Nobody could say things like "his healthcare plan is similar", or "he's another nation builder", or "his international policy is similar". He'd be a clear different choice. 6- I don't think he'd be another Ross Perot running as a Republican. He'd split the vote if he ran as an independent. I think he'd be quite interesting.
Hum, I dunno.
This thread shows that's wrong.
I really, really don't think that is true. If you put Obama next to Paul, Paul comes off looking like the more principled and honest candidate, but since he actually says what he believes, his views make Obama look like far, far more center candidate. Paul is awesome for being true about his beliefs and even though I disagree with him on a lot of things I'm glad he is in government. But lets face it, he is and ideologue and his views are at the far end of an extreme. Certainly no the person who is going to unite a divided government.
Libertarians already vote for Republicans. What you say in #1 is at least as true of them as it is of Conservatives.
The young people behind Paul are not the same young people who backed Obama. I think it's a different thing. A lot of the people who back Paul are young. But that doesn't mean a lot of young people back Paul. On the whole, young folks are more liberal. I don't think they'll back someone like Paul. They may be less enthusiastic about Obama than they were last time, but they're not "switching sides" as it were. Their disappointment in Obama more often than not comes from him not being liberal enough. A lot of young people (and middle-aged people like me) thought he would fight for single payer and are a little ticked that he didn't stand up for it at all. That certainly doesn't make me want to go vote for a guy who wants the government completely out of health care.
No question there. But that cuts two ways. Obama, like him or not, won big. Paul looks nothing like that formula. See my observations on #2.
If any of them run a campaign outside the Republican party you can wrap the election up and hand it to President Obama with a bow. I'm pretty sure you can do that no matter what. It is looking more and more like a done deal that the Republicans will win both houses of Congress and the Democrats will retain the White House.
You'll need to log in to post.
