Anyone here voting for Obama? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Anyone here voting for Obama?


Tilley
04-04-2012, 22:42
I am not trolling, just wanted to know who likes Obama and why. It seems like a lot of folks will be voting for him this year, and perhaps there is something I am missing.

Maybe he is good for this country. What do you think?

stevelyn
04-04-2012, 23:00
I'm sure there are. But they couldn't give you any objective reasons as to why. It's pretty hard to defend a bad decision that has no merit.

juggy4711
04-04-2012, 23:12
I am not trolling, just wanted to know who likes Obama and why. It seems like a lot of folks will be voting for him this year, and perhaps there is something I am missing.

Maybe he is good for this country. What do you think?

He is fantastic and deserves my vote without a doubt. Seriously though Romney might buy us some time to fix things but the reality is that voting for more Obama just sinks the ship faster.

So it depends on your stance. Do we put off the inevitable as long as we can or do we face it head on? Personally I would rather confront directly. ID the losing side and move from there.

TalkToTheGlock
04-04-2012, 23:19
I'd rather vote for Kony,


iPhone 4

Wil Ufgood
04-04-2012, 23:25
http://data.whicdn.com/images/9586535/obama-steve_large.jpg

juggy4711
04-04-2012, 23:35
I'd rather vote for Kony,


iPhone 4

http://www.moltz.net/~john/images/iVotedForKodos.gif

427
04-05-2012, 00:08
Yeah, there are a couple or three Ron Paul supporters who've stated that they will vote for Obama since their guy has no chance. They want to teach the GOP and America a lesson.


Saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

Obama will bring about change, although it won't be the change he's hoping for.

Mittens will not. Mittens is politics as usual, and for those who are repulsed by the trend we're on, electing somebody who will maintain that trend is unacceptable.

Conservatives, by definition, fear change. That is why conservatives are on board with Mittens despite his unconservative credentials. They know he's "safe". They know he won't change anything.

The time for "safe" is gone. Let Obama bring the pot to a full boil quickly, and let's see what America is made of.

I simply don't buy that we wouldn't "survive" another 4 years of Obama. I can't stand the guy but if it takes him getting re-elected to wake up the GOP and it's party fan boys to give us a candidate worth a crap then so be it. Calling me an Obama supporter because I won't vote for Romney is ridiculous, I'm the guy voting for the candidate who is the furthest thing from Obama there is. If you insist on pulling the lever for whomever the GOP puts up there no matter how bad they are (yes I know he's supposedly a "little" better than Obama, that's a matter of opinion as his track record certainly doesn't seem to indicate that) then YOU are the problem not me. So go ahead and blame Ron Paul supporters all you want I really don't care the way I see it you have had every opportunity to do the same you keep insisting we do which is to join your side. If Obama is re-elected then you are just as much to blame if not more so for being so easily convinced to accept a candidate that doesn't stand for anything conservative other than not being Obama. I've gone along and voted straight Republican ever since I could vote and it has gotten us to where we are today. Not anymore and until the GOP gives us someone worth a damn, not ever again!

I agree with the OP.

I hope Obama will win the 2nd term so he could shake us up. If Romney is TPOTUS and then he will send us back to our beds, while the America is decaying.

Obama is the only best shot we have at this time for 2nd term (I wish we could elect Ron Paul, but America doesn't want him at this time.) It is America's fault. If we elect Ron Paul but it might won't change anything because of the gridlock on the senator/house floor.

Obama = Romney, no question.

Ok here you guys are going to trash at me for what I am about to say. Please understand that I love America and none of us are learning a lesson from 2004 and past and therefore I say:

If Ron Paul is out then I'll vote Obama to trash GOP. GOP needs to go under; I mean it.

Who got us Obama? McCain! Romney as our GOP will get us Obama fo sho! If you are in denial of that then you are sticking your head into the sand!

GOP will never win a President race in the future; that's way too obvious!!! GOP is wayyyy too divided.

I am going to vote Obama because this race is fixed for Obama. The America is screwed up because the majority of Americans aren't capable to understand the politic, economy, and the moral standard that's horrible. They just want to see more drama and to divide ourselves.

I don't think RP will win 2012 because many of us are idiots. I recommend you to take pictures of the America in hardcopy (those pictures will be the historical documents); look at Detroit for example. Enjoy the America while it lasts.

That's a respectable strategy, not because the race is "fixed", but because the wider the margin of defeat for the GOP, against such a poor incumbent, in such a bad economy, the better the likelihood of the realization that a major shift is needed.

The other option is a third party vote. If enough people do it because of the abysmal choices this time around, the "unelectability" of third parties may be called into question. I don't realistically think it will happen this time around, it may take a few more cycles, but I'm keeping my options open until November.


Romney, Newt, and Rick would do same thing. We need more mad people to call for a change in WH; Obama is the only best person to make it happen.

Go Obama for a serious change! (I desire to see RP as a POTUS, but Americans are that dumb to not vote him and to think of him as unelectable candidate per to the media).

MoneyMaker
04-05-2012, 05:20
Cant vote for anyone running this time around!!!!!!!!!!

Mrs. Tink
04-05-2012, 08:00
Yeah, there are a couple or three Ron Paul supporters who've stated that they will vote for Obama since their guy has no chance. They want to teach the GOP and America a lesson.

They are not saying they are voting for Obama because Ron Paul has no chance. They are saying that running Obama-lite is not going to pull us back from the edge of the cliff.

This is not about teaching anyone a lesson. The GOP has shown that it refuses to learn the lesson, and America has forgotten what it used to stand for. I'm pretty tired of the GOP running the same tired old candidate, just under different names.

I could never vote Obama. But I frankly do not thing anything meaningful is going to change under Romney (or Santorum). Certain things will get worse under them. The chance of real reform is pitifully thin.

mj9mm
04-05-2012, 08:04
I'm ready to vote him off the island, does that count?:dunno:

oldsoldier
04-05-2012, 08:10
I don't think any of them are worth a damn but I will vote a straight Republican ticket.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 08:11
Yeah, there are a couple or three Ron Paul supporters who've stated that they will vote for Obama since their guy has no chance. They want to teach the GOP and America a lesson.


Yep, many Ron Paul supporters have repeatedly stated they will vote for Obama just to teach America a lesson.

Additionally those who refuse to vote, are in essence denying the republicans a much needed vote. This benefits only Obama.

All those who will never be satisfied with ANY republican candidate except Ron Paul are supporting Obama more than they know.

Not voting for, or refusing to support the republican candidate, is a vote for Obama.

RCP
04-05-2012, 08:15
They are not saying they are voting for Obama because Ron Paul has no chance. They are saying that running Obama-lite is not going to pull us back from the edge of the cliff.

This is not about teaching anyone a lesson. The GOP has shown that it refuses to learn the lesson, and America has forgotten what it used to stand for. I'm pretty tired of the GOP running the same tired old candidate, just under different names.

I could never vote Obama. But I frankly do not thing anything meaningful is going to change under Romney (or Santorum). Certain things will get worse under them. The chance of real reform is pitifully thin.

Thanks for clarifying before I could, your spot on. No I am not voting for Obama. I simply may not vote at all with the choices being given to me not to mention the way that I've been ridiculed by so called "Conservatives" as a Ron Paul supporter. If you think that equates to a vote for Obama being I'm not helping the Republican Obama get elected than sorry. Maybe next time they'll give us a better choice instead of a liberal progressive with an R behind his name.

RCP
04-05-2012, 08:18
Yep, many Ron Paul supporters have repeatedly stated they will vote for Obama just to teach America a lesson.

Additionally those who refuse to vote, are in essence denying the republicans a much needed vote. This benefits only Obama.

All those who will never be satisfied with ANY republican candidate except Ron Paul are supporting Obama more than they know.

Not voting for, or refusing to support the republican candidate, is a vote for Obama.

Voting for Romney is a vote to move the Republican party farther left than it already is.

Mrs. Tink
04-05-2012, 08:22
Yep, many Ron Paul supporters have repeatedly stated they will vote for Obama just to teach America a lesson.

Additionally those who refuse to vote, are in essence denying the republicans a much needed vote. This benefits only Obama.

All those who will never be satisfied with ANY republican candidate except Ron Paul are supporting Obama more than they know.

Not voting for, or refusing to support the republican candidate, is a vote for Obama.

Wow. None are so blind as those who refuse to see.

Dalton Wayne
04-05-2012, 08:23
I don't think any of them are worth a damn but I will vote a straight Republican ticket.
Agreed

stsai465
04-05-2012, 08:31
Not a big fan of who's left on the GOP side, but I'd vote for a ham sandwich before I vote for Obama.

RCP
04-05-2012, 08:33
I don't think any of them are worth a damn but I will vote a straight Republican ticket.

And what do you think that will gain us other than an even more liberal Republican candidate in the future? I keep hearing we will avoid disaster (which is highly debatable) but we can also do that by taking the Senate back with a Republican majority. At this point I'd rather have that and have the Fed'l Gov locked into doing nothing due to bipartisan politics rather than gaining the Senate back along with a liberal progressive "conservative" President with a record of legislating his own healthcare mandates and permanent assault weapon bans. Honestly its a little worrisome to think of a Republican Congress and Senate with a President Romney at the helm. We don't have to reward the GOP for giving us such a crappy candidate by electing Romney.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 08:36
Voting for Romney is a vote to move the Republican party farther left than it already is.

That seems to be the battle cry of the Ron Paul supporters.

But, how can you be certain that Romney will move the republican party farther left?

Romney's previous record indicates he's a tax and spend liberal, but America is in serious financial trouble and the days of business as usual are over. Romney knows that.

On the other hand, Obama doesn't care and if re-elected he will go full blown socialist on the American people. He'll drastically raise taxes to pay for healthcare, he'll take ALL our guns, he'll severely restrict our freedoms and give the right to vote to all the illegal immigrants that can cross the border.

Romney will do none of that stuff or anything like it, simply because he wants a second term.

We have a choice between a socialist that WILL make America worse, and a republican candidate who MIGHT make things worse.

Not the best of choices, but that's the hand we've been dealt.

To me the choice is clear, but then my mind isn't infected with the Ron Paul syndrome.

Big Mad Dawg
04-05-2012, 08:37
I will vote for anyone but the obama, even RP if he ever made it that far.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 08:45
Wow. None are so blind as those who refuse to see.

I'm voting for Romney or whoever the republican candidate is.
Obama has to go. That's priority #1.

There's no guarantee that any republican candidate will make things worse. With a republican we at least have a chance to turn things around.

Not so with Obama.

Now, who are you voting for and why?

Tango 1Zero
04-05-2012, 08:49
What he said! If you set this one out you might as well figure your not voting is helping Obama stay in.

I'm voting for Romney or whoever the republican candidate is.
Obama has to go. That's priority #1.

There's no guarantee that any republican candidate will make things worse. With a republican we at least have a chance to turn things around.

Not so with Obama.

Now, who are you voting for and why?

Gundude
04-05-2012, 08:52
I am not trolling, just wanted to know who likes Obama and why. It seems like a lot of folks will be voting for him this year, and perhaps there is something I am missing.

Maybe he is good for this country. What do you think?You will find almost nobody who likes Obama and almost nobody who likes Romney. Neither of them are good for the country.

You will only find argument over who is the lesser of two evils. If you look past the doomsdayers and drama queens to the people with a track record of posting reasonable thoughts on this forum, you'll see that rational arguments can be made for either of them, but in the end, the reason Obama is surprisingly the favorite for re-election is due solely to the grotesque nature of his competition, not due to any liking of Obama himself.

JFrame
04-05-2012, 08:52
I believe even Glenn Beck is backing off on that famous "frog in the pot" analogy he made regarding John McCain. Not that he doesn't believe McCain was a progressive-at-heart in many ways. But Beck now says that having Obama as president has been so harmful and disastrous to the country, that even McCain would have been preferable.


.

Gundude
04-05-2012, 08:53
I believe even Glenn Beck is backing off on that famous "frog in the pot" analogy he made regarding John McCain. Not that he doesn't believe McCain was a progressive-at-heart in many ways. But Beck now says that having Obama as president has been so harmful and disastrous to the country, that even McCain would have been preferable.


.Yeah, it's easy to talk the talk, but harder to walk the walk, isn't it?

DonGlock26
04-05-2012, 09:04
I am not trolling, just wanted to know who likes Obama and why. It seems like a lot of folks will be voting for him this year, and perhaps there is something I am missing.

Maybe he is good for this country. What do you think?

I'm not seeing these mythical GTPI Obama voters in this thread.

_

series1811
04-05-2012, 09:12
You will find almost nobody who likes Obama and almost nobody who likes Romney. Neither of them are good for the country.

You will only find argument over who is the lesser of two evils. If you look past the doomsdayers and drama queens to the people with a track record of posting reasonable thoughts on this forum, you'll see that rational arguments can be made for either of them, but in the end, the reason Obama is surprisingly the favorite for re-election is due solely to the grotesque nature of his competition, not due to any liking of Obama himself.

Rational arguments to keep Obama? Where? He's a rational choice if you don't pay any income tax, live off government entitlements, and want to keep things like that, or if you're a Wall Street banker or financial trader, and need to count on him to not get in your way.

I think you have gotten us mixed up with DU. Check your sign in. You're on Glocktalk (the one about Glocks) today.

Mrs. Tink
04-05-2012, 09:17
Romney's previous record indicates he's a tax and spend liberal, but America is in serious financial trouble and the days of business as usual are over. Romney knows that.
...

Romney will do none of that stuff or anything like it, simply because he wants a second term.


I tend to disagree here. Romney's proposals show no real will to cut spending as drastically as is necessary to avoid economic disaster. And the argument that people who want second terms won't act too crazy has pretty much been blown to pieces by Obama.

Your efforts to insult Ron Paul supporters by bookending your entire post with pejoratives isn't really helping your argument in a thread such as this.

I'm voting for Romney or whoever the republican candidate is.
Obama has to go. That's priority #1.

There's no guarantee that any republican candidate will make things worse. With a republican we at least have a chance to turn things around.

Not so with Obama.

Now, who are you voting for and why?

Yes, getting Obama out should be one of the goals Republicans are focusing on at a national level. The other is retaking the Senate (and keeping the House). So why are they running craptastic candidates that have a low likelihood of doing this?

I am NOT VOTING for Obama, which I had already tried to make clear.

Colorado is a caucus state. I was elected as a delegate to my county assembly, which in turn elected me as a delegate to the state assembly. The nice thing about this is that I can vote for whomever I choose at the state level. The state GOP is already playing games as to who is going to be voted onto the national convention ballot. Romney supporters are all being put first, with no regard to which county they are from or alphabetical order. All other delegates are not only being put on there without noting who they support (i.e. Santorum, Gingrich etc.) but they are being marginalized by party officials. I don't like such shenanigans. I will likely vote Paul at the state (I am currently unpledged), where he won't win, and I won't pursue national.

We will see who the nominee will be. I think we all know, but there may yet be some surprises.

John Rambo
04-05-2012, 09:30
I'm a Ron Paul supporter. He is exactly what we need right now.


I was 50/50 between Obama Romney, really undecided. But when Obama and Holder attempted to Usurp SCOTUS a couple of days ago, I decided I'll be voting for Romney. Unless Romney manages to screw up in a major way between now and election day, that is.

series1811
04-05-2012, 09:39
I'm a Ron Paul supporter. He is exactly what we need right now.


I was 50/50 between Obama Romney, really undecided. But when Obama and Holder attempted to Usurp SCOTUS a couple of days ago, I decided I'll be voting for Romney. Unless Romney manages to screw up in a major way between now and election day, that is.

If there are that many people out there who really think that Obama is a reasonable alternative to Ron Paul, we really are doomed.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 09:47
Your efforts to insult Ron Paul supporters by bookending your entire post with pejoratives isn't really helping your argument in a thread such as this...


That's because I think Ron Paul supporters are a direct threat
to the republican nominee's chances of getting elected.

They consistently find fault with the republican party and all it's candidates.

For them it's Ron Paul or nothing. This indicates they have no use for the republican party, except as a vehicle to get Ron Paul national exposure.

That's all well and good except for one small glitch.
Ron Paul is unelectable. He will NEVER be president.

So why do the Ron Paul supporters continue to hang on?
Even rats know when to abandon ship.

They definitely do not support the republican party or it's candidate.

It appears that they want to destroy the republican's chances for election out of spite
for not making Ron Paul the nominee?

Could they really be Obama supporters in disguise?

Either way, Ron Paul supporters are no friend of the republican party
and this benefits Obama more than it hurts the republicans.

brickboy240
04-05-2012, 10:01
I cannot vote for anyone with a "D" after their name...so no for me.

However, if Obama wins a second term (...that he does NOT deserve) then when the US dollar loses it's place as the exchange currency for the world and the dollar crashes and hyperinflation kicks in...there is not way they can spin this to be the fault of the GOP, conservatives or Bush. They own the crash.

(This IS coming for those that doubt....so is another Moody's credit downgrade...or two)

This, coupled with the second housing crash, the unemployment numbers and 4-5 dollar gas will mean that the Democrats OWN the bad economy. There is no way they can avoid not getting tagged as the bunch that brought it all down...no matter how big media spins it.

Maybe we NEED to have this happen, to wake the people and have them oust the liberals and leftists for good?

People still have it too good...after the hyperinflation, dollar crash and a few years of 4-5 dollar gas....THAT might actually wake them up.

Sad that we will have to actually go through this...but I don't see how we can avoid it anymore.

- brickboy240

Gundude
04-05-2012, 10:10
That's because I think Ron Paul supporters are a direct threat
to the republican nominee's chances of getting elected.You're right. What are the republican nominees going to do about it? Move towards some semblance of smaller, less intrusive government, as is enshrined in their party platform (but only serves as irony these days) to attract the Ron Paul supporters, or simply mock them and cause them to go elsewhere?

They consistently find fault with the republican party and all it's candidates.

For them it's Ron Paul or nothing. This indicates they have no use for the republican party, except as a vehicle to get Ron Paul national exposure.

That's all well and good except for one small glitch.
Ron Paul is unelectable. He will NEVER be president.

So why do the Ron Paul supporters continue to hang on?
Even rats know when to abandon ship.

They definitely do not support the republican party or it's candidate.

It appears that they want to destroy the republican's chances for election out of spite
for not making Ron Paul the nominee?

Could they really be Obama supporters in disguise?

Either way, Ron Paul supporters are no friend of the republican party
and this benefits Obama more than it hurts the republicans.What you don't get is that the point isn't to "hurt" the Republicans. It's to make them honor their platform of smaller, less intrusive government. No government will get smaller or less intrusive on its own. There's no money in that. They have to be made to do it, and the only way that can happen is if they know they will lose every election until they do.

RCP
04-05-2012, 10:14
Exactly, sometimes a little tough love is required to get back on track.

brickboy240
04-05-2012, 10:14
What is the difference?

There is literally no difference in the fiscal policy of the last Republican (Dubya) and that of Obama.

The GOP leaders always SAY they want smaller govt and less spending but they never really deliver on this promise.

- brickboy240

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 10:17
Maybe we NEED to have this happen, to wake the people and have them oust the liberals and leftists for good?

People still have it too good...after the hyperinflation, dollar crash and a few years of 4-5 dollar gas....THAT might actually wake them up.

Sad that we will have to actually go through this...but I don't see how we can avoid it anymore.

- brickboy240


So you're saying that we should just give up and flush this great country down the toilet, just so we can place the blame on the democrats?

Imagine the millions that would suffer because of that course of action.
Don't you have any concern for them?

How can you just give up on your country?

Shouldn't we grab on to whatever chance we have to save this great country?

Right now, that only chance is Mitt Romney.

Ruble Noon
04-05-2012, 10:18
That's because I think Ron Paul supporters are a direct threat
to the republican nominee's chances of getting elected.

They consistently find fault with the republican party and all it's candidates.

For them it's Ron Paul or nothing. This indicates they have no use for the republican party, except as a vehicle to get Ron Paul national exposure.

That's all well and good except for one small glitch.
Ron Paul is unelectable. He will NEVER be president.

So why do the Ron Paul supporters continue to hang on?
Even rats know when to abandon ship.

They definitely do not support the republican party or it's candidate.

It appears that they want to destroy the republican's chances for election out of spite
for not making Ron Paul the nominee?

Could they really be Obama supporters in disguise?

Either way, Ron Paul supporters are no friend of the republican party
and this benefits Obama more than it hurts the republicans.

Maybe the republican party should start adhering to the COTUS.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 10:27
What you don't get is that the point isn't to "hurt" the Republicans. It's to make them honor their platform of smaller, less intrusive government. No government will get smaller or less intrusive on its own. There's no money in that. They have to be made to do it, and the only way that can happen is if they know they will lose every election until they do.


I disagree.

The point IS to punish the republican party for not electing Ron Paul,
even if it means Obama's re-election.

It has nothing to do with the constitution or smaller government.
It's all about getting Ron Paul elected.

Ron Paul supporters have their own selfish reasons like anti-war,
anti-government and pro drug legalization.

Their hatred for the republican party and their love for the constitution are just
vehicles they use to get what they want.

They would NEVER be satisfied with any republican candidate no matter
if he lived and breathed the constitution.

To them it's Ron Paul or nothing.

brickboy240
04-05-2012, 10:28
Wake up.

Romney will not save a damn thing.

He is a big govt moderate that will keep on spending.

The collapse of the USD is inevitable. The GOP will not save us from the decades of rampant spending. There is literally no difference in the monetary policy of Bush and Obama. What makes everyone think that the NEXT GOP prez is going to right this ship?

It is not giving up or being pessimistic....it is being observant and aware of basic mathematics. Romney is not going to stop what is already in motion.

2008 was a warm up to what is coming.

- brickboy240

engineer151515
04-05-2012, 10:28
Personally, I cannot fathom how a person who openly states he does not believe in capitalism, free markets, and purposefully wants to spread everybody's wealth around ever got elected to President of the United States in the first place.

What a nightmare.

For all my reservations, at least Mitt believes in capitalism...

RCP
04-05-2012, 10:29
Nope sorry JB but you could not be any more wrong.

engineer151515
04-05-2012, 10:38
.
There is literally no difference in the monetary policy of Bush and Obama. ...

Obama spent Bush's 8 deficit in 3 years. That included 2 wars and the last 2 years of Bush's term with a Democrat controlled Congress.

I'd say there is a difference.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 10:43
Nope sorry JB but you could not be any more wrong.

Tell me how?

I've presented an optimistic and positive view of our conflict and offered a possible way out by electing the republican candidate.

I've identified that Ron Paul supporters do NOT have the best interests of this country at heart.

Everyone else has presented nothing but gloom and doom, it's better to let it all collapse, better to elect Obama because the republicans are evil, and only Ron Paul can save us crap.

All that negativism does nothing to help solve the problem.

How any of you know what Romney will do as president is beyond me.
Do you have crystal balls?

brickboy240
04-05-2012, 10:44
Bush started this whole "bailout" nonsense. After running as some sort of fiscal conservative that claimed he wanted to cut spending and reduce the deficit. Remember McCain going back to DC to vote "yes" on the first bailouts?

True, Obama made it much worse, but there is not really much difference in the two in the way they handle our monetary system, the Fed and Wall Street.

The GOP always SAYS it wants smaller govt and less spending but they never really deliver on it.

- brickboy240

janice6
04-05-2012, 10:47
not me.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 10:57
Maybe the republican party should start adhering to the COTUS.

How is ANYTHING the Ron Paul supporters are doing
going to move us closer to that goal?

How is voting for Obama going to achieve that goal?
How is refusing to vote going to achieve that goal?

Do you really believe that punishing the republican party
will make them adhere to the constitution?

Restless28
04-05-2012, 11:06
Vote NO on Obama. Vote Republican. Anybody but Obama. Take back the Senate and take more of the House.

427
04-05-2012, 11:13
They are not saying they are voting for Obama because Ron Paul has no chance. They are saying that running Obama-lite is not going to pull us back from the edge of the cliff.

This is not about teaching anyone a lesson. The GOP has shown that it refuses to learn the lesson, and America has forgotten what it used to stand for. I'm pretty tired of the GOP running the same tired old candidate, just under different names.

I could never vote Obama. But I frankly do not thing anything meaningful is going to change under Romney (or Santorum). Certain things will get worse under them. The chance of real reform is pitifully thin.
The quotes I have posted are very clear on the why these particular Paul supporters are going to vote for Obama. Very clear.
If this doesn't state the true reason why is guy is voting for Obama, I don't know what does!

If Ron Paul is out then I'll vote Obama to trash GOP. GOP needs to go under; I mean it.
Please tell me the above quote doesn't, in fact, say what it says.

Read this thread all the way through.
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1406756

RCP
04-05-2012, 11:14
Tell me how?- It's not about Ron Paul it's about a candidate who actually wants to not only limit the federal gov. but shrink it. Just so happens Ron Paul is the only candidate currently running who I can believe would try and do so.

I've presented an optimistic and positive view of our conflict and offered a possible way out by electing the republican candidate. -that's not a way out it's simply more of the same with a guy who has R behind his name and will only lead to pushing the Republican party even farther left than it is.

I've identified that Ron Paul supporters do NOT have the best interests of this country at heart.-not true at all. I want to see this country return to what made it great. Instead people seem content to let it continue down the path of destruction by electing candidates who continue to GROW the federal govt and ruin us economically through fear tactics.

Everyone else has presented nothing but gloom and doom, it's better to let it all collapse, better to elect Obama because the republicans are evil, and only Ron Paul can save us crap.- it's going to collapse regardless of which party is in power until we elect a candidate like Ron Paul. No other candidate currently is willing to make the changes needed to avoid even further collapse.

All that negativism does nothing to help solve the problem.-neither does living in denial and having some fantasy like belief that Mitt Romney is the solution to our problems.

How any of you know what Romney will do as president is beyond me.
Do you have crystal balls?-No we have his record as Gov of Massachusetts which now that he's being touted as the nominee everyone seems to want to either ignore or hypocritically defend.

Tried to answer best I could, hard to type as much as I'd like from my phone.

m51
04-05-2012, 11:20
They are not saying they are voting for Obama because Ron Paul has no chance. They are saying that running Obama-lite is not going to pull us back from the edge of the cliff.

This is not about teaching anyone a lesson. The GOP has shown that it refuses to learn the lesson, and America has forgotten what it used to stand for. I'm pretty tired of the GOP running the same tired old candidate, just under different names.

I could never vote Obama. But I frankly do not thing anything meaningful is going to change under Romney (or Santorum). Certain things will get worse under them. The chance of real reform is pitifully thin.

You are absolutely 100% correct mam....

Bren
04-05-2012, 12:08
There are 2 main groups of Obama supporters here. One group are open, hardcore democrat/socialist Obama supporters, but in order to troll here and argue with the "gun nuts" they pretend to be gun owners and Republicans or Libertarians or whatever.

The other group are those who will vote for a third party, or just refuse to vote, "on principle" even knowing that any vote not cast for the Republican candidate, no matter who it is, is exactly the same as a vote cast for Obama.

EXAMPLE:
I will likely vote Paul at the state (I am currently unpledged), where he won't win, and I won't pursue national.

That is a vote for Obama.

The election is between Obama and the Republican nominee. There are no other candidates who can possibly stop Obama from winning. A vote for the Republican cancels a vote for Obama, so a vote used any other way allows a vote for Obama to go unanswered.

Can anybody explain how voting for anyone other than the Republican doesn't put Obama one more vote ahead?

Javelin
04-05-2012, 12:10
There are 2 main groups of Obama supporters here. One group are open, hardcore democrat/socialist Obama supporters, but in order to troll here and argue with the "gun nuts" they pretend to be gun owners and Republicans or Libertarians or whatever.

The other group are those who will vote for a third party, or just refuse to vote, "on principle" even knowing that any vote not cast for the Republican candidate, no matter who it is, is exactly the same as a vote cast for Obama.

Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, Benito Mussolini I fail to see the difference.

Bren
04-05-2012, 12:11
Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, Benito Mussolini I fail to see the difference.

That says more about you than any of the three, either because you are serious, or because that is your best come-back.

Javelin
04-05-2012, 12:11
And one more thing Bren, some of us refuse to vote for whatever the Republican party throws up on the carpet.

I hold myself to a higher standard and have some self respect unlike so many others that obviously don't.

Javelin
04-05-2012, 12:13
That says more about you than any of the three, either because you are serious, or because that is your best come-back.

Yeah... you go ahead and vote for Mittens. You see the problem here is that the "Republican Party", much like yourself, are becoming happy in the left but still tout the conservative mask that has become nothing more than a costume.

Yeah it's hard hearing that but you know sometimes the truth hurts a little bit.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 12:25
There are 2 main groups of Obama supporters here. One group are open, hardcore democrat/socialist Obama supporters, but in order to troll here and argue with the "gun nuts" they pretend to be gun owners and Republicans or Libertarians or whatever.

The other group are those who will vote for a third party, or just refuse to vote, "on principle" even knowing that any vote not cast for the Republican candidate, no matter who it is, is exactly the same as a vote cast for Obama.

That is a vote for Obama.

The election is between Obama and the Republican nominee. There are no other candidates who can possibly stop Obama from winning. A vote for the Republican cancels a vote for Obama, so a vote used any other way allows a vote for Obama to go unanswered.

Can anybody explain how voting for anyone other than the Republican doesn't put Obama one more vote ahead?

Outstanding Post!

:thumbsup::goodpost::agree:

..

RCP
04-05-2012, 12:29
Yeah... you go ahead and vote for Mittens. You see the problem here is that the "Republican Party", much like yourself, are becoming happy in the left but still tout the conservative mask that has become nothing more than a costume.

Yeah it's hard hearing that but you know sometimes the truth hurts a little bit.

No this is an excellent post!

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 12:32
And one more thing Bren, some of us refuse to vote for whatever the Republican party throws up on the carpet.

I hold myself to a higher standard and have some self respect unlike so many others that obviously don't.

Would you please read Bren's post a couple of times and then take a few minutes to think about it?

This is NOT about what the republican party has become or who can change it back to it's conservative roots.

It's about defeating Obama in November and sending his socialist ass packing. Only the republican candidate has a chance to do that.

Krav Maglock
04-05-2012, 12:41
F*$k NO!!!!!!

oldman11
04-05-2012, 12:42
Surely you jest.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 12:52
F*$k NO!!!!!!

That can be interpreted several ways?
Care to explain?

Gundude
04-05-2012, 13:33
There are 2 main groups of Obama supporters here. One group are open, hardcore democrat/socialist Obama supporters, but in order to troll here and argue with the "gun nuts" they pretend to be gun owners and Republicans or Libertarians or whatever.

The other group are those who will vote for a third party, or just refuse to vote, "on principle" even knowing that any vote not cast for the Republican candidate, no matter who it is, is exactly the same as a vote cast for Obama.

EXAMPLE:


That is a vote for Obama.

The election is between Obama and the Republican nominee. There are no other candidates who can possibly stop Obama from winning. A vote for the Republican cancels a vote for Obama, so a vote used any other way allows a vote for Obama to go unanswered.

Can anybody explain how voting for anyone other than the Republican doesn't put Obama one more vote ahead?Yes, I can.

Your assumption that if that person didn't vote third party (or didn't refrain from voting altogether) they would've voted Republican is absolutely false. Therefore, since the Republican candidate never had the potential for that vote, they are not losing it, and Obama is not gaining a vote as a result.

Bottom line is that the Republican nominee doesn't deserve that person's vote any more than Obama does. The election is between the Republican nominee and Obama. If you don't vote for Obama, then you're actually putting the Republican nominee one vote ahead, correct? :whistling:

Swiper
04-05-2012, 13:42
I am not trolling, just wanted to know who likes Obama and why. It seems like a lot of folks will be voting for him this year, and perhaps there is something I am missing.

Maybe he is good for this country. What do you think?

I will. He is an average performer as the President of the United States. Not great, not bad, just average. Unfortunately the GOP have not shown me any reasonably good candidate to run against him. Romney and Santorum the front runners? That MUST be a bad joke of some sort.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 13:50
Bottom line is that the Republican nominee doesn't deserve that person's vote any more than Obama does...

This is the attitude that causes me to believe that these people
are actually Obama supporters.

Only an Obama supporter would condemn the republican party at every turn.

Only an Obama supporter would condemn every republican candidate, in turn,
as they come into the public spotlight.

Only an Obama supporter would condemn the only republican candidate
that stands a chance of beating Obama.

Only an Obama supporter would campaign for Ron Paul,
knowing that Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance.

Yep, we've got a lot of Obama supporters on this forum.

Gundude
04-05-2012, 13:55
This is the attitude that causes me to believe that these people
are actually Obama supporters.

Only an Obama supporter would condemn the republican party at every turn.

Only an Obama supporter would condemn every republican candidate, in turn,
as they come into the public spotlight.

Only an Obama supporter would condemn the only republican candidate
that stands a chance of beating Obama.

Only an Obama supporter would campaign for Ron Paul,
knowing that Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance.

Yep, we've got a lot of Obama supporters on this forum.False assumptions, every one of them.

RCP
04-05-2012, 14:03
If you don't vote for Obama, then you're actually putting the Republican nominee one vote ahead, correct? :whistling:

Correct but they will refuse to see it that way. Of course I've heard often times how Ron Paul supporters are such a minority that were not worth paying attention to. That is until they want our votes, then our votes (or lack of) become crucial to their candidate winning.:upeyes:

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 14:06
False assumptions, every one of them.

No, your so called "concern" for the future for the republican party is very transparent.

RCP
04-05-2012, 14:09
So your happy with the direction of the Republican party with candidates such as Mitt Romney leading it JB?

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 14:14
So your happy with the direction of the Republican party with candidates such as Mitt Romney leading it JB?

No, but what other choice do I have?

Ron Paul will never be president, and I'll NEVER vote for Obama.

I have no choice but to vote for the republican candidate and hope for the best.

RCP
04-05-2012, 14:21
I'm not either but where you and I differ is whether were willing to continue enabling them to continue down that path or not. I'm not willing to give them my vote of approval to move us further left just because they think they have us by the short hairs. It's already been proven just in my lifetime that once you allow them to move that direction it's damn near impossible to reel em back. So IMO it's crucial to stop that direction and stop it NOW.

DOC44
04-05-2012, 14:31
IF ROMNEY ENDS UP WITH THE NOMINATION..............

You can either vote for obama dark and obama lite... CNN and FOX today are both pushing for Santorum to drop out.... he can't get the nominaiton... he need to quit.

We cannot beat obama with Romney... we have to go to a brokered convention and select a real CONSERVATIVE candidate... otherwise we are kissing obama and his crew's butt for another four years. The bigshots at the RNC want Romney and do not want a brokered convention that is why they are pulling out all the stops pushing for Santorum to drop out and saying that Romney is going to win PA. Several polls out there for PA but the one CNN and FOX keep reporting is the only one that has Romney leading.

O'Rielly SUX.

Doc44

Lethaltxn
04-05-2012, 14:33
IF ROMNEY ENDS UP WITH THE NOMINATION..............

You can either vote for obama dark and obama lite... CNN and FOX today are both pushing for Santorum to drop out.... he can't get the nominaiton... he need to quit.

We cannot beat obama with Romney... we have to go to a brokered convention and select a real CONSERVATIVE candidate... otherwise we are kissing obama and his crew's butt for another four years. The bigshots at the RNC want Romney and do not want a brokered convention that is why they are pulling out all the stops pushing for Santorum to drop out and saying that Romney is going to win PA. Several polls out there for PA but the one CNN and FOX keep reporting is the only one that has Romney leading.

O'Rielly SUX.

Doc44

I've been very disappointed with fox this primary season.

JFrame
04-05-2012, 14:35
F*$k NO!!!!!!

Surely you jest.

That can be interpreted several ways?
Care to explain?


Hey, JB -- I just assumed both gentlemen were responding to the thread subject title... :)


.

GLOCK17DB9
04-05-2012, 14:38
Let me think about it for a minute!
NO!
:tongueout:

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 14:41
We cannot beat obama with Romney... we have to go to a brokered convention and select a real CONSERVATIVE candidate...

And just who might that "real CONSERVATIVE" candidate be?

The suspense is killing me?:rofl:

pipedreams
04-05-2012, 14:53
Would you please read Bren's post a couple of times and then take a few minutes to think about it?

This is NOT about what the republican party has become or who can change it back to it's conservative roots.

It's about defeating Obama in November and sending his socialist ass packing. Only the republican candidate has a chance to do that.

:agree:

It is hold your nose and vote for the republican or four more years of Obama, your choice. Four more years of Obama means the Supreme Court will tilt left and there goes your gun rights who knows what else.

DOC44
04-05-2012, 14:55
And just who might that "real CONSERVATIVE" candidate be?

The suspense is killing me?:rofl:

I really don't know anymore. I have supported Newt but the MSM has beat him up so badly he would have real trouble winning now. I really don't know and it is frustrating to loose something so important as our country to a bunch of lying cheats. Too many sheep grazing on government free pastures.

:dunno:

Doc44

Javelin
04-05-2012, 15:04
And just who might that "real CONSERVATIVE" candidate be?

The suspense is killing me?:rofl:

Having to even ask that question is pretty sad isn't it?

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 15:07
Having to even ask that question is pretty sad isn't it?

Yes it is.

If a "real CONSERVATIVE", that has a chance of winning, steps up to the plate,
I'll vote for him several times.

Ruble Noon
04-05-2012, 15:11
How is ANYTHING the Ron Paul supporters are doing
going to move us closer to that goal?

How is voting for Obama going to achieve that goal?
How is refusing to vote going to achieve that goal?

Do you really believe that punishing the republican party
will make them adhere to the constitution?

Who's voting for obama or refusing to vote?

Do you really think that just because a republican is elected that our trajectory will change?

So, it is only recently that DeMint has acted like a real conservative. His scores went down when Bush was elected president and the Republicans controlled the Congress. His scores started to go up when the Democrats took over the Congress. And his scores went up even more when Obama was elected president.

http://lewrockwell.com/vance/vance285.html

The risk of electing a RINO liberal gun banning socialized medicine man from Mass. is that conservatives will quit acting like conservatives.

Mrs. Tink
04-05-2012, 15:52
The other group are those who will vote for a third party, or just refuse to vote, "on principle" even knowing that any vote not cast for the Republican candidate, no matter who it is, is exactly the same as a vote cast for Obama.

EXAMPLE:

I will likely vote Paul at the state (I am currently unpledged), where he won't win, and I won't pursue national.

That is a vote for Obama.


I haven't even finished catching up on the rest of this thread, but I must refute this. YOU ARE WRONG. Did you read the whole thing? Do you understand how a caucus state works??

The elected delegates go to the state assembly. In Colorado, this is on April 14. I am an elected delegate out of hundreds. All the delegates will vote on who they want Colorado's twelve national delegates to go to. I will likely vote Paul. Paul will not win it. Romney (probably) will get the Colorado delegates. Romney will add them to his tally at the national convention and they will be used to nominate him. It is NOT a vote for Obama in any way, shape or form. It is me stating my preference for who gets Colorado's delegates.

IT IS NOT A VOTE FOR OBAMA. Do not paint me with the broad brush you seem to be wielding.

nmk
04-05-2012, 16:25
There are 2 main groups of Obama supporters here. One group are open, hardcore democrat/socialist Obama supporters, but in order to troll here and argue with the "gun nuts" they pretend to be gun owners and Republicans or Libertarians or whatever.

The other group are those who will vote for a third party, or just refuse to vote, "on principle" even knowing that any vote not cast for the Republican candidate, no matter who it is, is exactly the same as a vote cast for Obama.

EXAMPLE:


That is a vote for Obama.

The election is between Obama and the Republican nominee. There are no other candidates who can possibly stop Obama from winning. A vote for the Republican cancels a vote for Obama, so a vote used any other way allows a vote for Obama to go unanswered.

Can anybody explain how voting for anyone other than the Republican doesn't put Obama one more vote ahead?


Your statement that not voting is equivalent to a vote for Obama is simply false.

Let's say the first voter goes D. The second voter thought about going R, but decided not to vote. Had he voted R, the score would be 1-1. Since he's not voting, the score is 0-1. If he had voted D, the score would be 0-2.

How long will people continue to claim that the last two outcomes are "exactly the same"?

FLIPPER 348
04-05-2012, 16:28
What is the difference?

There is literally no difference in the fiscal policy of the last Republican (Dubya) and that of Obama.




But there is quite the Iraq/Afghanistan policy between the two (and McCain). Hence we stuck to the pullout timetable in Iraq and will do so also in Afghanistan. For this President Obama got my vote the first tim around.

As for this next round y'all came up with Romney. Really? I'd rather have 4 more years of Obama than a possible 8 years of Romney. I would have happily voted for Newt.

KING-PIN
04-05-2012, 16:32
Am I voting for Obama?

Hell no.

Glock30Eric
04-05-2012, 17:23
That seems to be the battle cry of the Ron Paul supporters.

But, how can you be certain that Romney will move the republican party farther left?

Romney's previous record indicates he's a tax and spend liberal, but America is in serious financial trouble and the days of business as usual are over. Romney knows that.

On the other hand, Obama doesn't care and if re-elected he will go full blown socialist on the American people. He'll drastically raise taxes to pay for healthcare, he'll take ALL our guns, he'll severely restrict our freedoms and give the right to vote to all the illegal immigrants that can cross the border.

Romney will do none of that stuff or anything like it, simply because he wants a second term.

We have a choice between a socialist that WILL make America worse, and a republican candidate who MIGHT make things worse.

Not the best of choices, but that's the hand we've been dealt.

To me the choice is clear, but then my mind isn't infected with the Ron Paul syndrome.

The problem isn't Ron Paul or Obama. It's you and many other Americans have caused this mess. We could have fixed this situation long ago.

It is like your submarine is at the bottom of sea and listing because the captian wasn't paying attention to the details. You are running around in the ship doing everything as much as you could, but you won't be able to surface again.

I am sorry to say this. The game is over. It's too late to fix it. We are at the beyond of point to turn 180 degree from the direction we are heading to. Checkmate.

Your comments will be remembered to teach our future generations to not repeat the mistake we have made. Keep coming so we could have much of lessons to teach and to train them to be not one of you.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

The Machinist
04-05-2012, 17:32
Yes it is.

If a "real CONSERVATIVE", that has a chance of winning, steps up to the plate,
I'll vote for him several times.
You would never vote for a real conservative, nor would the majority of Americans. Therefore, a real conservative will never have a chance at winning.

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 17:39
The problem isn't Ron Paul or Obama. It's you and many other Americans have caused this mess. We could have fixed this situation long ago.

I am sorry to say this. The game is over. It's too late to fix it. We are at the beyond of point to turn 180 degree from the direction we are heading to. Checkmate....


What a crock of manure!

That's right, blame the American citizen for being too stupid to see things your way.
After all, you 1% Ron Paul supporters are smarter than the other 99% of voters that have rejected Ron Paul.

And the game is NOT over. If you had any confidence in this country and it's people,
you'd realize that.

It's never too late to turn things around.

You never, never give up and quit.
Have a little faith in your country.

This is your country, right?

..

JBnTX
04-05-2012, 17:44
You would never vote for a real conservative, nor would the majority of Americans. Therefore, a real conservative will never have a chance at winning.


Wrong!

The last real conservative beat Jimmy Carter by a landslide,
and I stood in line to vote for him.

Today, a real conservative would mop the floor with Obama,
and I'd stand in line to vote for him too.

RCP
04-05-2012, 18:13
One could argue that you are "giving up" by supporting Romney even though he's not a Conservative.

Gundude
04-05-2012, 18:17
I have no choice but to vote for the republican candidate and hope for the best.That must be very frustrating for you.

Gundude
04-05-2012, 18:22
Today, a real conservative would mop the floor with Obama,
and I'd stand in line to vote for him too.It's really too bad then that the Republicans threw away such an easy election.

What do you think it is about the Republican Party machine that prevents real conservatives from becoming candidates?

G17Jake
04-05-2012, 18:25
They are not saying they are voting for Obama because Ron Paul has no chance. They are saying that running Obama-lite is not going to pull us back from the edge of the cliff.

This is not about teaching anyone a lesson. The GOP has shown that it refuses to learn the lesson, and America has forgotten what it used to stand for. I'm pretty tired of the GOP running the same tired old candidate, just under different names.

I could never vote Obama. But I frankly do not thing anything meaningful is going to change under Romney (or Santorum). Certain things will get worse under them. The chance of real reform is pitifully thin.

I'll take my chances with Romney, if he is the nominee. I know what we have with Obama...

RCP
04-05-2012, 18:29
I'll take my chances with Romney, if he is the nominee. I know what we have with Obama...

All we have to do is look at his history and we know what we would have with Romney as well. You guys aren't any different than the people who ignored Obama's record and past and voted for him anyway in the name of "hope and change".

Gundude
04-05-2012, 18:29
:agree:

It is hold your nose and vote for the republican or four more years of Obama, your choice. Four more years of Obama means the Supreme Court will tilt left and there goes your gun rights who knows what else.
Which conservative justice do you think will retire during Obama's next term?

Glock30Eric
04-05-2012, 18:37
What a crock of manure!

That's right, blame the American citizen for being too stupid to see things your way.
After all, you 1% Ron Paul supporters are smarter than the other 99% of voters that have rejected Ron Paul.

Ok then why everyone isn't voting? How come many of voters couldn't explain at least five policies that Romney, Rick, Newt, and Paul stands for? That's the biggest problem we have at this time.

And the game is NOT over. If you had any confidence in this country and it's people,
you'd realize that.

It's never too late to turn things around.

You never, never give up and quit.
Have a little faith in your country.

This is your country, right?

..

Sorry --- it is still a checkmate.

I don't have much of faith in this country to be honest with you. If you have invested much of your faith in this country then you will be greatly disappointed (hopefully that you won't have to commit a suicide, yes it's going to be that BAD!)

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Gundude
04-05-2012, 18:37
All we have to do is look at his history and we know what we would have with Romney as well. You guys aren't any different than the people who ignored Obama's record and past and voted for him anyway in the name of "hope and change".That's a good point. Obama did exactly what the people who looked at his record expected him to do. What would possibly make somebody think Romney would do otherwise? His record is as a gun-grabbing, universal healthcare championing, money-grabbing corporate lackey. What part of his record could make anybody think he'd be an improvement over Obama?

G17Jake
04-05-2012, 18:40
All we have to do is look at his history and we know what we would have with Romney as well. You guys aren't any different than the people who ignored Obama's record and past and voted for him anyway in the name of "hope and change".

Between Obama and Romney, the better choice is Romney.

Romney gave MA state healthcare. MA is a very liberal state. If the people of MA want state run healthcare, and it doesn't violate the state's constitution, then they can have it. MA is a sovereign state. A very liberal sovereign state.

callihan_44
04-05-2012, 18:43
romney is probably going to drive us nuts but I would rather deal with that than O on his best day.....HELL NO TO O

Gundude
04-05-2012, 18:59
Between Obama and Romney, the better choice is Romney.

Romney gave MA state healthcare. MA is a very liberal state. If the people of MA want state run healthcare, and it doesn't violate the state's constitution, then they can have it. MA is a sovereign state. A very liberal sovereign state.Illinois is also a very liberal sovereign state...

RCP
04-05-2012, 19:02
Illinois is also a very liberal sovereign state...

You beat me to it!:supergrin:

G17Jake
04-05-2012, 19:34
Illinois is also a very liberal sovereign state...

And I will never live there. What's your point?

ETA: I am not excited about Romney being the Republican nominee. But to think he is no different than what we have with Obama is just not being honest.

Javelin
04-05-2012, 19:49
And I will never live there. What's your point?

ETA: I am not excited about Romney being the Republican nominee. But to think he is no different than what we have with Obama is just not being honest.

Honesty hurts peoples feelings sometimes.

I can understand how many are in denial and they are still holding on to hope that Romney will change things. But he won't. It'll just be another 4 years of leftist leaning only this time from a guy with an elephant by his name.

:faint:

RCP
04-05-2012, 20:03
The point is: I've never lived in Illinois and never plan to. Did that stop the politician elected from there trying to push his politics from the liberal sovereign state he came from onto the rest of the country?

G17Jake
04-05-2012, 20:18
The point is: I've never lived in Illinois and never plan to. Did that stop the politician elected from there trying to push his politics from the liberal sovereign state he came from onto the rest of the country?

Well, now I see the point you and Gundude were making, but I believe Romney said he would work to repeal Obamacare. May not even be necessary. He also said MA's healthcare was a state issue. Also, Obama campaigned on national healthcare, Romney isn't.

What Romney is not is a Saul Alinsky Radical and America-hating Marxist.

Correct me if I am wrong (like I even have to mention that :rofl: ) but I seem to remember reading that Romney will not grant amnesty to illegal aliens.

RCP
04-05-2012, 20:24
And what did he say about his permanent assault weapons ban?

DamonC
04-05-2012, 20:34
I will. He is an average performer as the President of the United States. Not great, not bad, just average. Unfortunately the GOP have not shown me any reasonably good candidate to run against him. Romney and Santorum the front runners? That MUST be a bad joke of some sort.

I searched for an extreme enough facepalm gif but there are some things even google can't do.

"Average"? "Not bad"? What would he have done differently for you to actually pronounce him bad?

G17Jake
04-05-2012, 20:36
And what did he say about his permanent assault weapons ban?

I don't know how much better Romney is than Obama regarding 'assault weapons'. Again.... I will look at what is the best I can get out of this election cycle.

The left was patient and methodical in moving this nation to this place we now are. We could learn something from them. Romney is to the right of Obama. Not as far as I would like, but I'll take what I can get.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J80AlgEQNoI&feature=youtu.be

rgregoryb
04-05-2012, 20:37
I searched for an extreme enough facepalm gif but there are some things even google can't do.

"Average"? "Not bad"? What would he have done differently for you to actually pronounce him bad?

hump his leg? bad president...bad president, quit that

stevelyn
04-05-2012, 21:36
I really don't know anymore. I have supported Newt but the MSM has beat him up so badly he would have real trouble winning now. I really don't know and it is frustrating to loose something so important as our country to a bunch of lying cheats. Too many sheep grazing on government free pastures.

:dunno:

Doc44

Does it have to be one of the monkeys in contention or can it be an outsider?

If an outsider can be drafted I'd pick Allen West.

pipedreams
04-05-2012, 22:22
Which conservative justice do you think will retire during Obama's next term?
I might of not of stated that quite right but do you want to give Obama the chance to appointment another liberal justice or would you rather have a republican president make the next appointment. While Ginsburg most likely will be the next to be replaced any one of the justices could die unexpectedly. If you have any interest in protecting the 2nd amendment one cannot take a chance on SCOTUS appointments. Presidents come and go but justices are there for life.

RCP
04-05-2012, 22:35
More fear tactics, I like the assumption though that the guy who signed a permanent assault weapon ban into law would appoint a 2nd Amendment friendly justice.:whistling:

Blast
04-06-2012, 01:24
http://groovyvic.mu.nu/archives/images/curly4prez.jpg

http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/US.jpg

Bren
04-06-2012, 04:39
And one more thing Bren, some of us refuse to vote for whatever the Republican party throws up on the carpet.

I hold myself to a higher standard and have some self respect unlike so many others that obviously don't.

I show up to vote understanding that it's a contest to determine a winner. If you aren't helping somebody win, you aren't part of the contest. I don't see how it can boost your self respect to take useless actions in a contest or fooling yourself about what you are accomplishing. Like they say, "play to win, or stay home."

Honesty hurts peoples feelings sometimes.

I can understand how many are in denial and they are still holding on to hope that Romney will change things. But he won't. It'll just be another 4 years of leftist leaning only this time from a guy with an elephant by his name.

:faint:

But that makes you an Obama voter, which makes your candidate a lot more left-leaning and WITHOUT the control of having to please the more pro-gun party.

In the end, your "principles" make you either a supporter of the Republican or Democrat that is the lesser of evils, or an unwitting supporter of the one you think is the greater of evils. You have NO OTHER CHOICE and no amount of argument about "principles" can change the reality of what you do.

Blindly following principles without understanding their effects is just "blindly following" and, in that case, you won't even know who you're following.

Bren
04-06-2012, 04:45
Yes, I can.

Your assumption that if that person didn't vote third party (or didn't refrain from voting altogether) they would've voted Republican is absolutely false. Therefore, since the Republican candidate never had the potential for that vote, they are not losing it, and Obama is not gaining a vote as a result.

Bottom line is that the Republican nominee doesn't deserve that person's vote any more than Obama does. The election is between the Republican nominee and Obama. If you don't vote for Obama, then you're actually putting the Republican nominee one vote ahead, correct? :whistling:

I guess I should have clarified - you can vote REPUBLICAN or DEMOCRAT. You can vote for any other candidate or aprty, without casting your vote for one of those.

A vote for a third party is ALWAYS a vote for the one of those you like the LEAST, as if there were no other parties or candidates.

That's the reality of the election.

If you prefer Obama to Romney, then voting 3rd party ia a vote for Romney. If your prefer Romney (assuming his wins the primary, of course) then a 3rd party vote is a vote for Obama.

I assumed we didn't have many people here who were goign to openly admit being Obama supporters, which is why I jumped to the conclusion that they would otherwise vote Republican.

I have said it that way (a vote for the party you like least) in a few other threads, so I didn't repeat everything in this one, figuring it was so obvious everybody would get that.

Bren
04-06-2012, 04:49
More fear tactics, I like the assumption though that the guy who signed a permanent assault weapon ban into law would appoint a 2nd Amendment friendly justice.:whistling:

What Romney did as governor of Mass. was controlled by the voters of Mass. - he does what gets him votes. In national politics, a republican candidate has to be pro-gun, just as he has to be anti-gun to win in Mass. politics.

For example - here in Kentucky EVERY pro-gun law from concealed carry to the castle doctrine to state preemption, etc., is written and passed by Democrats. If they were on the national stage, they would have to be anti-gun to win.

In short, the party controls the president ,more than the president controls the party. The BS "fear tactic" is ignoring something that obvious to try and spread anti-Romney/Pro-Obama messages.

bear62
04-06-2012, 07:33
I will vote against the fake currently in the White House.

Gundude
04-06-2012, 08:39
I guess I should have clarified - you can vote REPUBLICAN or DEMOCRAT. You can vote for any other candidate or aprty, without casting your vote for one of those.

A vote for a third party is ALWAYS a vote for the one of those you like the LEAST, as if there were no other parties or candidates.

That's the reality of the election.

If you prefer Obama to Romney, then voting 3rd party ia a vote for Romney. If your prefer Romney (assuming his wins the primary, of course) then a 3rd party vote is a vote for Obama.

I assumed we didn't have many people here who were goign to openly admit being Obama supporters, which is why I jumped to the conclusion that they would otherwise vote Republican.That is the assumption that's leading you astray. As hard as it may be for a dyed-in-the-wool Republican to believe an independent can favor Obama over Romney, there are valid reasons that somebody may do so, even if they despise both of them. Those reasons have been put forth repeatedly in this forum.

So when that person stays home or votes third party because they still can't bring themselves to vote for Obama, even though they prefer him in a lesser-of-two-evils kinda way, that's actually a win for Romney. It doesn't make that voter an Obama supporter in any sense.

Gundude
04-06-2012, 09:00
But that makes you an Obama voter, which makes your candidate a lot more left-leaning and WITHOUT the control of having to please the more pro-gun party.It sounds like you're not keeping up with the times. Apart from those in "safe districts", like Schumer and McCarthy, the Democrats at the national level have all but abandoned gun control as a losing venture which does nothing but cost them elections.

Even Obama and his majority Dem congress did nothing in two years, except make permitted carry legal in national parks and make straw purchases easier in border states.

The Dems are playing smart by taking one of key issues away from Republicans, and Republicans have made it far worse for themselves by bringing a proven anti-gunner to the forefront of their party. Now the choice for a single-issue gun voter isn't nearly as clear.

JFrame
04-06-2012, 09:08
Even Obama and his majority Dem congress did nothing in two years, except make permitted carry legal in national parks and make straw purchases easier in border states.


It is becoming more and more evident that Operation Fast & Furious was an attempt by Obama and his "Justice" department to generate a false narrative that U.S. guns streaming across the southwest border were responsible for drug violence, as a pretext to enacting more draconian gun laws. I think you are painting much too benign and gentle a picture there...


.

RC-RAMIE
04-06-2012, 09:18
But, how can you be certain that Romney will move the republican party farther left?

Romney's previous record indicates he's a tax and spend liberal, but America is in serious financial trouble and the days of business as usual are over. Romney knows that.
.

Really?



"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it is realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy. - Ron Paul

PrecisionRifleman
04-06-2012, 09:26
Ron Paul has my vote


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Flying-Dutchman
04-06-2012, 09:27
Vote for Obama with pride. Tell all your friends. Shout it from the rooftops. Stay on Mom’s healthcare plan at age 27; Obama’s your man.

No one believes your lame excuses why you are not voting Republican.

RC-RAMIE
04-06-2012, 09:40
Vote for Obama with pride. Tell all your friends. Shout it from the rooftops. Stay on Mom’s healthcare plan at age 27; Obama’s your man.

No one believes your lame excuses why you are not voting Republican.

Really don't care if they believe it or not, my vote will go to the person I agree with the most that will most likely go to a 3rd party. Between the D and the R well the will get the votes they deserve to get. Eight years of Mitt or 4 years of Obama not excited about either one but if the GOP loses I think they will, maybe they will run somebody worth voting for in 4 years. Imagine what they will run 8 years down the road after Mitt winning.


"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it is realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy. - Ron Paul

Bren
04-06-2012, 10:03
That is the assumption that's leading you astray. As hard as it may be for a dyed-in-the-wool Republican to believe an independent can favor Obama over Romney, there are valid reasons that somebody may do so, even if they despise both of them. Those reasons have been put forth repeatedly in this forum.

So when that person stays home or votes third party because they still can't bring themselves to vote for Obama, even though they prefer him in a lesser-of-two-evils kinda way, that's actually a win for Romney. It doesn't make that voter an Obama supporter in any sense.


As I explained in another post - the assumption is that most people here who will admit it, favor the Republican. However, no matter which party you favor between the big 2, voting thrid party is a vote for the one you dislike most. So, if you would vote Democrat, if Democrat and Repuyblican were the only parties that existed, then voting thrid party is a vote for the Republicans, just as a more conservative voter going third party is a vote for the Democrat.

In short, yes, I agree with your point, but I thought that was pretty obvious.

Bren
04-06-2012, 10:05
Ron Paul has my vote


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

You know that isn't true. Most Ron Paul voters would vote Republican if there were only 2 candidates and they were required to vote. Therefore, every one of those people who votes for Ron paul, or stays home, has just cast a vote to help Obama win.

Bren
04-06-2012, 10:11
It sounds like you're not keeping up with the times. Apart from those in "safe districts", like Schumer and McCarthy, the Democrats at the national level have all but abandoned gun control as a losing venture which does nothing but cost them elections.

Even Obama and his majority Dem congress did nothing in two years, except make permitted carry legal in national parks and make straw purchases easier in border states.

The Dems are playing smart by taking one of key issues away from Republicans, and Republicans have made it far worse for themselves by bringing a proven anti-gunner to the forefront of their party. Now the choice for a single-issue gun voter isn't nearly as clear.


It sounds like you are in that first group of Obama voters at GT, that I mentioned in my first post - the true pro-Obama voter - and you are trying to lay out some lame excuse for people to actually vote for him.

It is very, very clear how a single issue gun-rights voter should vote. In his second term, Obama can defeat gun rights without ever mentioning guns, or causing a single Senator or Rep to lose his/her job, just based on supreme court appointments. There is only one government body in America that can reverse Heller v. DC and McDonald v. Chicago and it only takes about 1 more anti-gunner appointed to the court to do it.

However, regardless of guns, anybody who passed economics 101, or who is concerned about their future health care, or a thousand other issues, should also be very worried about Obama winning

Gundude
04-06-2012, 10:38
However, regardless of guns, anybody who passed economics 101, or who is concerned about their future health care, or a thousand other issues, should also be very worried about Obama winningAnd should also be very worried about Romney winning.

Gundude
04-06-2012, 10:41
It is very, very clear how a single issue gun-rights voter should vote. In his second term, Obama can defeat gun rights without ever mentioning guns, or causing a single Senator or Rep to lose his/her job, just based on supreme court appointments. There is only one government body in America that can reverse Heller v. DC and McDonald v. Chicago and it only takes about 1 more anti-gunner appointed to the court to do it.I think Romney's appointed anti-gunner would have a better chance of being confirmed than Obama's appointed anti-gunner, if Obama even gets a chance to replace a non-liberal judge (it is more likely Romney will).

Gundude
04-06-2012, 11:00
You know that isn't true. Most Ron Paul voters would vote Republican if there were only 2 candidates and they were required to vote. Therefore, every one of those people who votes for Ron paul, or stays home, has just cast a vote to help Obama win.Even accepting your premise as true, I don't think most Ron Paul voters have a problem with that.

The bottom line is that a party whose only selling point is "we're not quite as bad as the other guy" doesn't deserve to win anything. Nobody has any illusions that Romney will turn around the deficit spending train. Only the most deluded believe he will turn around the Obamacare train. Nobody believes he will help repeal unconstitutional gun control laws. We know he won't stop illegal immigration.

There is no reason to vote for him. The best reason to vote against him is to help ensure that the next guy is nothing like him.

Slug71
04-06-2012, 12:02
RP as a write-in or nothing at all.

Booker
04-06-2012, 13:31
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” John Quincy Adams


I'll vote Libertarian!

JBnTX
04-06-2012, 13:54
I'll vote Libertarian!

How many libertarians have ever been elected to national office?

..

Glock30Eric
04-06-2012, 16:33
How many libertarians have ever been elected to national office?

..

Why are you encouraging the crab theory on him based from your comment?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

JBnTX
04-06-2012, 16:38
Why are you encouraging the crab theory on him based from your comment?



Can somebody translate this for me?:rofl:

MoneyMaker
04-06-2012, 16:43
Well i am gonna vote for Obahama that way all theses internet zombie hunters and Doomsday preppers will get there wish and can see how there skills play out,,,, Heck Romney will be the same way,So i say vote away and let these guys get there evil black rifles out and bunkers ready,They all got the Terminator sunglasses on.

Booker
04-06-2012, 19:53
How many libertarians have ever been elected to national office?

..

Back-off, man! We got almost 500.000 votes the last time around! :supergrin: That's almost 1/2 million people who value freedom over politics! I'm tired of the Status Quo still wanting me to take a bite of a Poop sandwich.

certifiedfunds
04-06-2012, 22:25
That seems to be the battle cry of the Ron Paul supporters.

But, how can you be certain that Romney will move the republican party farther left?

Romney's previous record indicates he's a tax and spend liberal,

:rofl:

certifiedfunds
04-06-2012, 22:32
We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts. I support them. I won't chip away at them. I believe that they help protect us and provide for our safety.

Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.

Well, let's get the record straight. First of all, there's no question that I support Second Amendment rights, but I also support an assault weapon ban.


.....

Krav Maglock
04-07-2012, 18:56
That can be interpreted several ways?
Care to explain?
I would never vote for that man or any democRAT.

Restless28
04-07-2012, 20:36
CF's post above is why I'm building my AK stuff up. It's the "most evil" of the assault rifles, and I think it would be the one most at risk.

BTW, I love the "evil" AK. Not just because it's simple and reliable, but, also because it gives a great big "**** You!" to the gun haters and takers.

Glock30Eric
04-07-2012, 20:56
CF's post above is why I'm building my AK stuff up. It's the "most evil" of the assault rifles, and I think it would be the one most at risk.

BTW, I love the "evil" AK. Not just because it's simple and reliable, but, also because it gives a great big "**** You!" to the gun haters and takers.

Pix!!!!


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Restless28
04-07-2012, 21:30
Pix!!!!


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

I'm doing it backwards, so to speak. I'm building my ammo stores and mag numbers while the rifle(s) on layaway. The 5.45 is totally new for me. I'm starting from scratch.

NEOH212
04-07-2012, 22:52
I'm not sure who I will be voting for at this point but I know it won't be Obama. :supergrin:

ICARRY2
04-08-2012, 15:14
Not a chance!!!!!