914Driver wrote:DILYSI Dave wrote: I can't see myself voting for Romney at all.So it it's Obama vs Romney you're doing Obama?
I am going third party.
914Driver wrote:DILYSI Dave wrote: I can't see myself voting for Romney at all.So it it's Obama vs Romney you're doing Obama?
I am going third party.
carguy123 wrote: He [Ron Paul] needs to get our votes for all the same reasons Pres. Hope got the the last time. [...] Let's be honest Obam got elected because he was black not because of anything he'd ever done.
Ron Paul is black? That's a surprise. Does he have the same doctors as Michael Jackson?
carguy123 wrote: Let's be honest Obam got elected because he was black not because of anything he'd ever done.
And not because a.) He wasn't Bush, and b.) McCain could very well die after his tenth heart transplant, leaving Palin to throw nukes at any country that didn't agree with her vision of the US.
Obama rallied the college kids and minorities. Remember the woman who said Obama's gonna pay her mortgage? Wonder how she's doing?
MitchellC wrote:carguy123 wrote: Let's be honest Obam got elected because he was black not because of anything he'd ever done.And not because a.) He wasn't Bush, and b.) McCain could very well die after his tenth heart transplant, leaving Palin to throw nukes at any country that didn't agree with her vision of the US.
+1
JoeyM wrote:MitchellC wrote:+1carguy123 wrote: Let's be honest Obam got elected because he was black not because of anything he'd ever done.And not because a.) He wasn't Bush, and b.) McCain could very well die after his tenth heart transplant, leaving Palin to throw nukes at any country that didn't agree with her vision of the US.
got Ron Paul followed by a tie for a distant second by Gingrich and Huntsman. Romney only beat Santorum on my list. Interesting, I did always like Ron Paul
914Driver wrote:DILYSI Dave wrote: I can't see myself voting for Romney at all.So it it's Obama vs Romney you're doing Obama?
Nope. Johnson.
I haven't voted for a republican since Dole. No reason to start now if Romney is the best they have to offer.
Paul, then Gingrich, then Huntsman.
Sounds about right to me.
Obama, Huntsman and Newt.
First two sounds about right for me.
I'll probably vote for Obama (again) and I don't feel a bit sorry about it; I think it's likely to be the best option.
(but no worries if some of you guys feel differently.....I respect diffences and won't tell you I "feel sorry" for you).
I'm surprised some of you guys don't talk up Buddy Roemer. I know he won't win, but he seems like a decent choice.
http://www.buddyroemer.com/
SATAN 2012:
no more "lesser of two evils" for me!
AngryCorvair wrote: SATAN 2012: no more "lesser of two evils" for me!
In reply to DILYSI Dave:
Notice how Johnson wasn't even an option in the quiz there? That is the problem we have in the country- anybody who runs outside the two major parties is kind if screwed, which is a shame, because most voters land right in the middle of the two parties, and neither party really represents a good choice for them.
Otto Maddox wrote: Obama and Huntsman ended up bunched together at the top for me.
Yup. Me too.
As dissatisfied as so many on both sides are, someone should starte a movement to write in "none of the above". I regularly don't cast a vote for a race or an issue if I don't like the options available, but if there was an organized movement for "none of the above" and a lot of us did it, it would at least send them some message.
A Libertarian ex-judge poses some interesting questions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eD_ybaXhXno
Obviously, he's no fan of the two-party system. And although Ron Paul isn't electable in today's climate, he is planting seeds that might make for a viable, future alternative - if he lives long enough.
I came across this earlier today. I agree with it.
Ron Paul, to the Not-Romneys: Drop Out! When added to Paul's top-tier showing in Iowa, it's clear he is the sole Republican candidate who can take on and defeat both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.
The race is becoming more clearly a two-man race between establishment candidate Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, the candidate of authentic change. That means there is only one true conservative choice.
Ron Paul has won more votes in Iowa and New Hampshire than any candidate but Mitt Romney.
Ron Paul and Mitt Romney have been shown in national polls to be the only two candidates who can defeat Barack Obama.
And Ron Paul and Mitt Romney are the only two candidates who can run a full, national campaign, competing in state after state over the coming weeks and months. Ron Paul's fundraising numbers -- over $13 million this quarter -- also prove he will be able to compete with Mitt Romney. No other candidate can do all of these things.
Ron Paul is clearly the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney as the campaign goes forward.
We urge Ron Paul’s opponents who have been unsuccessfully trying to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney to unite by getting out of the race and uniting behind Paul’s candidacy.
Pretty funny stuff. Bottom line: Paul tripled his vote in New Hampshire over 2008, after more than doubling it in Iowa. Romney was the same in Iowa, and slightly up in New Hampshire. He's got the Mitt-mentum, and the glide path to the nomination, but something very interesting is happening in the underbrush.
http://reason.com/blog/2012/01/10/ron-paul-to-the-not-romneys-drop-out
Paul, Bachmann 
, Santorum
Don't like Santorum
Would nail Bachmann and tell all my friends
Paul has always seemed alright to me
Also why wasn't Vermin Supreme on the list?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFXXAuDK1Ao
I got Ron, Newt, and Paul. Guess I'm a republican per this
Obama, Huntsmen, Romney.
Sounds about right based on their stance on most issues.
Of course Huntsmen is way too moderate and logical to ever get the GOP nod.
Oh noes, a post that is longer than a 3 sentence paragraph. My head is a gonna assplode! You guys are the real problem. You are easily managed and swayed by sound bites and headlines that have nothing to do with the real story. I’m sorry, but on this one you’ll have to read the whole story. I’ll make it simple so that your brain doesn’t assplode.
A car pulls up to a railroad crossing and the gates are down. There are 5 people in the car and they are talking when one of them suddenly spies babies on the train tracks. Yes, BABIES! We don’t know how they got there, that’s not important. What is important is that there is a train barreling down the track and headed for the babies. There are 5 people but 7 babies. What are you going to do?
One bright soul notices that there are 2 tracks and there are more babies on one track than the other so he proposes that someone run over to the switch and make sure the train goes on the track with the fewest number of babies.
Someone else says we need to stop that train only they realize they can’t because it’s too close. There’s simly not enough time.
Someone else says I can’t make this tough of a decision. So why don’t we just build a 3rd track real quickly and put the train on that one. Someone smart smacks him on the head and says that’s a good idea to do before the next train arrives, but right now we have babies on the track and we’ve got to deal with it!
Now they notice the babies are running around and the other track has more babies on it. So they quickly have to decide which track to put the train on.
Someone else says to heck with that let’s go grab as many babies as we can get. We don’t have enough to save them all but we can save some. Another says babies dying is morally repugnant to a superior being like myself so I propose we go back into time and alter our ancestor’s DNA so that we can run fast enough to get to the train and stop it.
No matter which way you choose it still leaves you with dead babies so what did you accomplish by refusing to vote, voting none of the above, or going with a third party?
We have a 2 party system. Why do you think the Tea Party got smart and folded themselves into the Republicans? Because our current system doesn’t allow for a third party to be successful.
The votes are owned by the electoral college which is owned by the Dems & Reps. You’ve got to get them to sell a 3rd party a share in the company before you can have a 3rd party. You can’t just wish it into existence. You will have to work for it , pay for it and maybe even run for office to make it a reality and that will take time. It won’t be easy and it will take lots of time. Much more time than we have between now and November.
Our vote doesn’t elect the President. Our vote suggests to the members of the Electoral college how we’d like them to vote, but they don’t have to vote that way. So what if we overwhelmingly vote for Larry the Cable Guy, do you really think the Reps and Dems in the College will cast their vote that way? What happens if you actually did get Larry the Cable Guy elected? He has no support system. Congress is full of Republicans & Democrats. He needs a support system. That doesn’t come overnight.
Right now the train is coming and there’s no time to build a track or a 3rd party. By definition the lessor of 2 evils is the best choice and the way to vote. At least that way you are helping the country move forward instead of allowing it to crash and burn while you sit there all morally superior on top of the ruins. You have no food, clothes, job or money, but you’ve always got your self righteousness don’t you? How well does that car drive?
You guys who didn’t vote or who voted for none of the above or for a third option are more responsible for the dead babies than anyone. The other people at least voted and tried to help. You did nothing or in some case hindered people from moving forward.
And this is why there are many people missing from the list of candidates on that page. They simply don't matter.
In reply to carguy123:
I don't care. I am not voting for Romney or Obama or damn near anyone running from the Republican party. Ron Paul might be getting my vote but he has a lot of things that I don't agree with and a lot I really agree with. Also I like Huntsman.
You'll need to log in to post.
