Veep Pick Paul Ryan Is No Conservative [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Veep Pick Paul Ryan Is No Conservative


Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 08:50
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12432-veep-pick-paul-ryan-is-no-conservative

The Machinist
08-12-2012, 09:02
Is that all you got? Facts?

DOC44
08-12-2012, 09:07
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12432-veep-pick-paul-ryan-is-no-conservative

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/41591_213394792029_525326_n.jpg

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 09:12
http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/41591_213394792029_525326_n.jpg

I must have forgotten that conservatism meant support for TARP, Medicare D, auto bailouts, formation of DHS and the TSA, Indefinite detainment of Americans. Etc..

jakebrake
08-12-2012, 09:23
that's all you got? a tin foil source? oh, wait...i'm not surprised.

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 09:28
that's all you got? a tin foil source? oh, wait...i'm not surprised.

If you don't like the source you can look up his record for yourself.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 10:26
You're as predictable as Barrack Obama. If every politician was given a no tolerance allowance for being a human being. Not even Lord Paul himself would qualify. The votes you speak of were voted on by Republican congress containing many conservatives hanstrung by a RINO President. Those were George Bush's policies not Paul Ryan's. "And you can take that to the bank!"

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSqw1MRRepkypzQPwIuJ24hIYyJXIRpfT5cgn_Ro9bin6Qk49rcFA

And if you wish to do the same song and dance, please do it on the Ron Paul Forum. This gets REAL old...

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 10:30
Furthermore where's George Bush this Republican convention?

"At home washing his tights."

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT_QJGB2d0zh-WsyTQCmr1KavmbUoKEp4I7w_XU4PMtLFo8kWxw

concretefuzzynuts
08-12-2012, 10:41
http://i1076.photobucket.com/albums/w459/concretefuzzynuts/liberal_crap.jpg

Cavalry Doc
08-12-2012, 10:43
Look at the bright side, a Paul made it onto the ticket. It's progress.

Cambo
08-12-2012, 10:44
Paul Ryan not a conservative? I guess according to you I should vote for Obama. Or should I vote for Ron Paul and write him to make a statement? What a load of crap this thread is.

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 10:50
Paul Ryan not a conservative?

Nope, not a conservative. He is a Neocon though. That's something I guess. :dunno:

Cavalry Doc
08-12-2012, 10:59
Most conservatives realize that neoisolationism is a failing strategy.

Anyone that would spend a dollar on defense or that would not withdraw every single troop from overseas is a neocon to some.

It's sad to see the code pink crowd pretending to be conservatives.

JBnTX
08-12-2012, 10:59
Nope, not a conservative. He is a Neocon though. That's something I guess. :dunno:


I wondered how long it would take you and the other Ron Paul supporters to start trashing Paul Ryan?

I never imagined you'd pounce on him this quick.

Barack Obama thanks you for your support.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 11:07
http://i1076.photobucket.com/albums/w459/concretefuzzynuts/liberal_crap.jpg+1 This is getting old. If you mean my post, it was an illustration of what's at play. I'm as conservative as you are.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 11:09
Paul Ryan not a conservative? I guess according to you I should vote for Obama. Or should I vote for Ron Paul and write him to make a statement? What a load of crap this thread is.But it is what we come to expect. Isn't it?

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 11:11
Most conservatives realize that neoisolationism is a failing strategy.

Anyone that would spend a dollar on defense or that would not withdraw every single troop from overseas is a neocon to some.

It's sad to see the code pink crowd pretending to be conservatives.You think that's what's at play Doc? You may be onto to something.

concretefuzzynuts
08-12-2012, 11:13
I just think it's time to leave Bush out of this. We are now well past those years and can't go back. Our focus should be on the now.

And I apologize if I generalized.

PawDog
08-12-2012, 11:23
http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/0/8/5/1/9/6/worship-messiah-68300876427.jpeg

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 11:27
I wondered how long it would take you and the other Ron Paul supporters to start trashing Paul Ryan?

I never imagined you'd pounce on him this quick.

Barack Obama thanks you for your support.

I've been telling you about Ryan for a long time. Enjoy your VAT tax that is part of his bold economic plan that balances the budget in 2040, maybe.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 11:33
I just think it's time to leave Bush out of this. We are now well past those years and can't go back. Our focus should be on the now.

And I apologize if I generalized.The whole point behind this "GOP is RINOs" crowd is hinged on George W. Bush. Every policy that they try to highlight comes from George W. Bush. And yet where is George W. Bush? At home, wanting nothing to do with it. That's my point Concrete.

I went out of my way to help get Bush 43 re-elected. And defended him, even against my better judgment. Because of his soft liberal policies and failure to defend himself on Iraq, he left the door wide open for Barrack Obama and today leaving some feeling that the economy is still his fault.

It is this stuff. That has feed the folks that now paint all GOP politicians as neocons and every other rot-gut imaginable.

I still believe he's a good man. But he was way too progressive on many policies. And that legacy can't be avoided. My beef is, look at all we gave him. That 2004 election was not easy. And the next four years wasn't any rosier. The country came together behind George W. Bush believing it was the right thing. And it was.

But where is he now? When the country needs him? At home. Thatís the point. These folks like to use Bush as an Acme bomb to blow up the coyote. Except the coyote isn't even there.

ChuteTheMall
08-12-2012, 11:36
I never imagined you'd pounce on him this quick.



I did.

No matter who the real Republicans nominated, these phony RINO libertarians (pretending to be conservatives) were always ready to attack him (in order to help Obama destroy America so they could rebuild it).

:tinfoil:

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 11:41
I did.

No matter who the real Republicans nominated, these phony RINO libertarians (pretending to be conservatives) were always ready to attack him (in order to help Obama destroy America so they could rebuild it).

:tinfoil:Is that your take Chute? How do the libertarians plan to wrestle away control from a big totalitarian state? Send in Ron Paul on a mercy mission?

countrygun
08-12-2012, 11:41
I did.

No matter who the real Republicans nominated, these phony RINO libertarians (pretending to be conservatives) were always ready to attack him (in order to help Obama destroy America so they could rebuild it).

:tinfoil:


Indeed.

They had the boilerplate written, they were just waiting for a name to plug in it.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 11:44
Look at the bright side, a Paul made it onto the ticket. It's progress.I missed this. :thumbsup:

Kingarthurhk
08-12-2012, 11:46
I guess politics in this country will always been the shrewd leading the naive around.

Slogans over substance.

tgmr05
08-12-2012, 11:47
The reality for our country is simple, and is why the left is so wound up. From a conservative standpoint, which is how a supermajority of the country runs their own lives, there is no comparison......Paul Ryan or Obama? Obama may not even register in that contest. So, the left is out flailing around trying oh so desperately to destroy the opposition any way they can, because they know what is about to happen to their precious leader....


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Angry Fist
08-12-2012, 11:51
Dude gets my vote. Miles ahead of the other idiots.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 11:51
The reality for our country is simple, and is why the left is so wound up. From a conservative standpoint, which is how a supermajority of the country runs their own lives, there is no comparison......Paul Ryan or Obama? Obama may not even register in that contest. So, the left is out flailing around trying oh so desperately to destroy the opposition any way they can, because they know what is about to happen to their precious leader....


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engineI hope you're right sir. About the outcome. I hope you're right.

countrygun
08-12-2012, 11:55
I guess politics in this country will always been the shrewd leading the naive around.

Slogans over substance.


This coming from a man who called a 14-year Congressman "inexperienced"?:upeyes:

:rofl::rofl:

Cavalry Doc
08-12-2012, 12:24
I wondered how long it would take you and the other Ron Paul supporters to start trashing Paul Ryan?

I never imagined you'd pounce on him this quick.

Barack Obama thanks you for your support.

It is getting old. Yadda yadda yadda, Ron Paul is the only true conservative, yadda yadda yadda .

The man is, and has always been a libertarian. There is a difference between libertarianism and conservatism. Accept it or not, that's the truth.

countrygun
08-12-2012, 12:29
It is getting old. Yadda yadda yadda, Ron Paul is the only true conservative, yadda yadda yadda .

The man is, and has always been a libertarian. There is a difference between libertarianism and conservatism. Accept it or not, that's the truth.


You have to be an idiot or an immature, inexperienced young voter to not see how the "libertarians" have tried to redefine "conservative" into some half-breed liberal bastige position.

Libertarian is the true "redefined Neo-con", they are "liberal-lites"

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 12:40
You have to be an idiot or an immature, inexperienced young voter to not see how the "libertarians" have tried to redefine "conservative" into some half-breed liberal bastige position.

Libertarian is the true "redefined Neo-con", they are "liberal-lites"Correct. The more I hear them talk. The more I believe it. In the extreme cases.

G-19
08-12-2012, 12:47
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12432-veep-pick-paul-ryan-is-no-conservative

What a bunch of crap, just more LIBERALtarian garbage.

GAFinch
08-12-2012, 12:48
Wow, so a junior politician voted with his party on a couple issues while publicly saying he didn't personally support it? The horror!!! The horror!!!

G-19
08-12-2012, 12:49
You have to be an idiot or an immature, inexperienced young voter to not see how the "libertarians" have tried to redefine "conservative" into some half-breed liberal bastige position.

Libertarian is the true "redefined Neo-con", they are "liberal-lites"

I prefer to call them liberaltarians.

GAFinch
08-12-2012, 12:54
You have to be an idiot or an immature, inexperienced young voter to not see how the "libertarians" have tried to redefine "conservative" into some half-breed liberal bastige position.

Libertarian is the true "redefined Neo-con", they are "liberal-lites"

People with objective morals are hard to change. Make their sense of morality subjective, you've won the long-term war.

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 13:05
What a bunch of crap, just more LIBERALtarian garbage.

Share your knowledge, which part? :popcorn:

beforeobamabans
08-12-2012, 13:08
You have to be an idiot or an immature, inexperienced young voter to not see how the "libertarians" have tried to redefine "conservative" into some half-breed liberal bastige position.

Libertarian is the true "redefined Neo-con", they are "liberal-lites"

This is a real load of bilge water. You either have no idea what these terms really mean or your such a party thug that all you want to do is swing bilndly at anyone not in lockstep with what the party tells you to do. The term "Brown Shirt" comes to mind.

The problem is that the GOP has drifted away from classic conservative principles. Barry Goldwater wouldn't recognize "his party". I am grateful for the Tea Party and the influence of Ron Paul in attempting to reform the party back to the party of small government. These efforts, while not yet succeeding on the national level, have had some major successes on the local level, witness the dethroning of Richard Lugar in Indiana. The people that made this happen in the Republican Party are the very people you spit on.

Those of you who are happy with the current ticket need to get off your high horses and quit beating down the Ron Paul devotees. If Romney is smart, he'll throw Ron a bone at the convention in an effort to bring his followers into the fold. You will need every single one of their votes.

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 13:08
It is getting old. Yadda yadda yadda, Ron Paul is the only true conservative, yadda yadda yadda .

The man is, and has always been a libertarian. There is a difference between libertarianism and conservatism. Accept it or not, that's the truth.

Yes, there is a difference. The libertarian wing of the republican party (Paul is a republican as you know) believes in smaller government and more freedom from government while the neocon wing is for big spending, big government and more assaults on the constitution and our god given rights.

JFrame
08-12-2012, 13:18
This coming from a man who called a 14-year Congressman "inexperienced"?:upeyes:

:rofl::rofl:


Well -- you see, Ryan may not be attuned to the ways of how the world actually works because it's very possible that he never drove a forklift... :whistling:


.

countrygun
08-12-2012, 13:19
This is a real load of bilge water. You either have no idea what these terms really mean or your such a party thug that all you want to do is swing bilndly at anyone not in lockstep with what the party tells you to do. The term "Brown Shirt" comes to mind.

The problem is that the GOP has drifted away from classic conservative principles. .


Now who is peddling the bilge water?

Pro-abortion and legalized drugs are part of the "classic conservative values"?

How old are you? When did these "Classic values" get revealed to you?

I started out paying attention to politics, as a kid, with the '72 election. I majored in political science in college as a result. Now just exactly when was this "classic" period of conservative politics?

No, you are the one who sounds like a brown shirt, trying to enforce the "new view" of what is classic thinking.

Something like "four legs good---two legs better"

beforeobamabans
08-12-2012, 13:45
Now who is peddling the bilge water?
:yawn: Really? You bore me, but I'll give one more good ol' college try.


Pro-abortion and legalized drugs are part of the "classic conservative values"?

Of course not. And you think these are positions Ron Paul and Libertarians support? See, you just confirm my suspicion that you have no idea what you're taking about. That makes my job of trying to educate you nearly impossible.

How old are you? When did these "Classic values" get revealed to you?

58. My dad worked in the Goldwater campaign when I was ten. We were crushed by LBJ's underhanded campaign tactics and the fact the country fell for them. A foreshadowing of things to come.

I started out paying attention to politics, as a kid, with the '72 election. I majored in political science in college as a result. Now just exactly when was this "classic" period of conservative politics?

While you were starting to pay attention, I was casting my first vote as an 18 year old. Of course it was Nixon vs. McGovern then, not much of a choice and we didn't know then what we know now about the victor. I've voted for every GOP presidential candidate since. The only one I'm happy with is Reagan. I said it in 1980 and I've said it here on occasion, the most conservative electable politician in my lifetime. That's still true, and food for thought when contemplating how you get what you want in politics.

No, you are the one who sounds like a brown shirt, trying to enforce the "new view" of what is classic thinking.

I'm not trying to "enforce" anything. After all, this is an Internet forum, not a university class. I do, nonetheless, attempt to educate those like you who misuse elemental terms in a blind effort at hyperbole.

Something like "four legs good---two legs better"

This is cute but I'll admit to being unable to discipher your true meaning. Try again.

Rob1109
08-12-2012, 13:51
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12432-veep-pick-paul-ryan-is-no-conservative

Fine! Then vote for Obama !!!!!!!!

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 14:01
Fine! Then vote for Obama !!!!!!!!

Why would I vote for Obama?

beforeobamabans
08-12-2012, 14:06
Fine! Then vote for Obama !!!!!!!!

Ruble's conundrum is that, if he's a true Libertarian, he can't vote for Obama and he knows it. He can vote for Johnson but he doesn't want to waste his vote. He's extremely disappointed over RP's failure to catch on and is still pouting by throwing darts at the politicians who beat out RP. I get it. But, at some point, you've got to quit mourning, come out of your funk and get on with it. As an intelligent political thinker, he will eventually realize that in a choice of Obama/Biden vs Romney/Ryan, the one closest to his principles is the latter. Making this evaluation and selection is what voting is all about and always has been. We very, very rarely get our idea of a perfect candidate to vote for.

So the real question for Ruble is, are you going to vote for what's really in your own best interests, then keep working to bend things your way next time around?

Cavalry Doc
08-12-2012, 14:09
Yes, there is a difference. The libertarian wing of the republican party (Paul is a republican as you know) believes in smaller government and more freedom from government while the neocon wing is for big spending, big government and more assaults on the constitution and our god given rights.

Paul is a RINO. It is a marriage of convenience. Ever read his letter of resignation from the republican party?

A moment of honesty in a career politician that has lied before. His campaign commercial about Perry and Reagan is just one example.

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2011/09/ron-paul-the-man-who-stood-with-reagan-until-he-ran-from-him.html

countrygun
08-12-2012, 14:14
This is cute but I'll admit to being unable to discipher your true meaning. Try again.

I am not surprised you can't. BTW look up the word "Decipher" to start your own education


BTW Goldwater? I see you carry on the family winning streak

F350
08-12-2012, 14:26
I've been telling you about Ryan for a long time. Enjoy your VAT tax that is part of his bold economic plan that balances the budget in 2040, maybe.

You prove you are too ignorant to even engage in a rational rebate by this statement, you don't even know what a VAT tax is.

beforeobamabans
08-12-2012, 14:26
Paul is a RINO. It is a marriage of convenience. Ever read his letter of resignation from the republican party?

A moment of honesty in a career politician that has lied before. His campaign commercial about Perry and Reagan is just one example.

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2011/09/ron-paul-the-man-who-stood-with-reagan-until-he-ran-from-him.html

I'm curious Doc, what is your definition of a real Republican?

The Machinist
08-12-2012, 14:31
As an intelligent political thinker, he will eventually realize that in a choice of Obama/Biden vs Romney/Ryan
You call that a choice? Voting for which flavor of statism is a choice? Both support welfare spending, both support Medicare Part D, both support No Child Left Behind, and both support the NDAA. That's a not a choice. That's a sick joke, and the joke's on all of us. Obama, Biden, Romney, or Ryan - take your pick. None of them have any interest in cutting spending, or reducing the size of the federal government.

Cavalry Doc
08-12-2012, 14:37
I'm curious Doc, what is your definition of a real Republican?

Considering that it's a party, and not just a political philosophy, one that works for the party. I'd also like to see the Republicans move toward the austerity measures we need. But the Libertarian foreign picy is nuts, I'm not too hot on open borders. The drug policy lacks a responsibility requirement.

I do disagree with some popular libertarian platform planks, as proposed by several here.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 14:45
This is a real load of bilge water. You either have no idea what these terms really mean or your such a party thug that all you want to do is swing bilndly at anyone not in lockstep with what the party tells you to do. The term "Brown Shirt" comes to mind.

The problem is that the GOP has drifted away from classic conservative principles. Barry Goldwater wouldn't recognize "his party". I am grateful for the Tea Party and the influence of Ron Paul in attempting to reform the party back to the party of small government. These efforts, while not yet succeeding on the national level, have had some major successes on the local level, witness the dethroning of Richard Lugar in Indiana. The people that made this happen in the Republican Party are the very people you spit on.

Those of you who are happy with the current ticket need to get off your high horses and quit beating down the Ron Paul devotees. If Romney is smart, he'll throw Ron a bone at the convention in an effort to bring his followers into the fold. You will need every single one of their votes.I agree. But there are those. And you know who they are. That you can't convince in any case. Those are the ones he's talking about. And if he's not, than I agree with you, he's painting with too broad a brush.

Tell me how easy it is to argue against such an inflexible position. I am not a fan of the Republican estiablishment. I would have taken Santorum anyday over Mitt Romney. But I have to look at the situation, and see if there's any attempt on Romney's part to move in my direction. I see Paul Ryan as Veep as such a move. I would love Ron Paul as Secretary of the Treasury or Head of the Fed. And that's something I've said before.

But there is a schism of some libertarians to show the same common sense you display. I too believe Libertarians and Conservatives have a lot in common, and what we don't agree on is small compared to what we do. I didn't realize there was such a rift between conservatives and some libertarians until reading this forum.

And on the flip side, there are some party wonks that think there is nothing wrong with the current leadership of the GOP. But first, few of them appear on here. And second the rest of us, who don't stand for the Rockerfeller way, are getting sick and tired of being misrepresented by a select half dozen "Ususal Suspects" on Glock Talk. Those are the ones I refer to when I'm talking about libertarian excess.

Thanks.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 14:49
Ruble's conundrum is that, if he's a true Libertarian, he can't vote for Obama and he knows it. He can vote for Johnson but he doesn't want to waste his vote. He's extremely disappointed over RP's failure to catch on and is still pouting by throwing darts at the politicians who beat out RP. I get it. But, at some point, you've got to quit mourning, come out of your funk and get on with it. As an intelligent political thinker, he will eventually realize that in a choice of Obama/Biden vs Romney/Ryan, the one closest to his principles is the latter. Making this evaluation and selection is what voting is all about and always has been. We very, very rarely get our idea of a perfect candidate to vote for.

So the real question for Ruble is, are you going to vote for what's really in your own best interests, then keep working to bend things your way next time around?+ 1 This is what most people fed up that kind of position are talking about.

QNman
08-12-2012, 15:07
Did he vote for some items that make my blood boil? Yup. Do I think he's an ideal candidate? Nope (though arguably better than Romney himself).

Do I think he's a wide berth greater than Uncle Joe?

Yup.

beforeobamabans
08-12-2012, 15:14
You call that a choice? Voting for which flavor of statism is a choice? Both support welfare spending, both support Medicare Part D, both support No Child Left Behind, and both support the NDAA. That's a not a choice. That's a sick joke, and the joke's on all of us. Obama, Biden, Romney, or Ryan - take your pick. None of them have any interest in cutting spending, or reducing the size of the federal government.

Not a choice, it is THE choice you've been given, like it or not. We tried to push the pile farther toward smaller government, but GOP primary voters told us they just aren't ready at this time. So, the distillation process has done it's work and you're left with what you're left with. So, the question is, what are you going to do about it?

You have four options: Obama, Romney, Johnson or stay home. What you have to think calmly and rationally about is, which choice furthers your cause(s). Knowing where you are coming from (I've gone through the same process), the answer becomes pretty obvious. If you are a true Libertarian, you cannot vote for Obama because, of the choices available, he is furthest from your principles and best interests. Johnson is closest but you know voting for him is a wasted vote. You don't like hearing that but, in your heart you know it's true. This is a two party system and it's going to stay that way. You could stay home but being the political activist you are, you believe above all else in participation. That leaves you with the best, albeit flawed option, voting for Romney/Ryan, hoping that they will at least do-no-harm while in office or maybe even pushing the puck slightly toward your POV.

So there it is. Distasteful perhaps but you know in your heart you'll do what's best for your own interests and the country's future which surely means retiring BHO.

QNman
08-12-2012, 15:21
Well -- you see, Ryan may not be attuned to the ways of how the world actually works because it's very possible that he never drove a forklift... :whistling:


.

Hey... I was a fork truck operator for THREE YEARS! I guess that means I am qualified!! :woohoo:

ChuteTheMall
08-12-2012, 15:24
Hey... I was a fork truck operator for THREE YEARS! I guess that means I am qualified!! :woohoo:

Real forklift operators don't call them fork trucks.:okie:

QNman
08-12-2012, 15:26
Real forklift operators don't call them fork trucks.:okie:

Busted... in my defense, this WAS back in the 80's... and not my only job at the time.

beforeobamabans
08-12-2012, 15:26
I agree. But there are those. And you know who they are. That you can't convince in any case. Those are the ones he's talking about. And if he's not, than I agree with you, he's painting with too broad a brush.

Tell me how easy it is to argue against such an inflexible position. I am not a fan of the Republican estiablishment. I would have taken Santorum anyday over Mitt Romney. But I have to look at the situation, and see if there's any attempt on Romney's part to move in my direction. I see Paul Ryan as Veep as such a move. I would love Ron Paul as Secretary of the Treasury or Head of the Fed. And that's something I've said before.

But there is a schism of some libertarians to show the same common sense you display. I too believe Libertarians and Conservatives have a lot in common, and what we don't agree on is small compared to what we do. I didn't realize there was such a rift between conservatives and some libertarians until reading this forum.

And on the flip side, there are some party wonks that think there is nothing wrong with the current leadership of the GOP. But first, few of them appear on here. And second the rest of us, who don't stand for the Rockerfeller way, are getting sick and tired of being misrepresented by a select half dozen "Ususal Suspects" on Glock Talk. Those are the ones I refer to when I'm talking about libertarian excess.

Thanks.

It is time for healing, reuniting the party and gathering as many votes as possible. As I've tried to explain to the died-in-the-wool Libertarians, their best interests lie in anyone but Obama, who is furthest from their principles. Politics is the art of the possible. Most times, you fall far short of perfection and so the goal becomes to move the pile slightly in your direction.

MartinRiggs1987
08-12-2012, 15:34
It is time for healing, reuniting the party and gathering as many votes as possible. As I've tried to explain to the died-in-the-wool Libertarians, their best interests lie in anyone but Obama, who is furthest from their principles. Politics is the art of the possible. Most times, you fall far short of perfection and so the goal becomes to move the pile slightly in your direction.Move the ball forward. And not in the way Obama means.

tgmr05
08-12-2012, 16:37
There are two choices, for the most part, Obama/Biden or Romney/Ryan. Which is the better choice for our nation at this time. It is that simple.

One has proven budgets do not exist, bills must be passed without knowing exactly what is in them, looks down on business owners/self employed and tells them so, and thinks/says homeless/poor folks create jobs/wealth through trickle up economics...

Why would any sane person vote for that again? Unless Romney has a hidden agenda to copy Obama and spend more, pass secret legislation, never even submit a budget, etc. while openly shutting business down in our country, who cares about all this other stuff? Romney ran a state, not just talked about how it should or could be done.

Obama will probably make millions, after being defeated, doing what he did before, whining and whipping groups into a frenzy while yelling he knows how things could be fixed, after FAILING to do so with complete control for years........


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

snerd
08-12-2012, 18:06
I find myself agreeing whole-heartedly with the Libertarians here..... Ruble, The Machinist, barbedwiresmile, etc., etc. The Statist Monster is growing beyond control of 'we the people'. Every facet of day-to-day life is governed by so many laws and rules and permits and licenses that we will never be able to get control of this Beast.

However.............. I've thought long and hard about this election year. All of the posts stating the Republican ticket is not conservative are correct. I was not going to support the outrageous, liberal, big-government Romney in any way. The addition of Ryan has softened me a bit, although he supported many entitlement and bailout spending bills. I've come to the conclusion that I will go vote for them in November. The thought of another 4 years of the squatter is just too much to endure. You conservatives will have to forgive me, but I believe that it's the right thing to do, at least for this particular election year. So it is written, so it shall be done. Forgive me my lack of principle.

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 18:18
Ruble's conundrum is that, if he's a true Libertarian, he can't vote for Obama and he knows it. He can vote for Johnson but he doesn't want to waste his vote. He's extremely disappointed over RP's failure to catch on and is still pouting by throwing darts at the politicians who beat out RP. I get it. But, at some point, you've got to quit mourning, come out of your funk and get on with it. As an intelligent political thinker, he will eventually realize that in a choice of Obama/Biden vs Romney/Ryan, the one closest to his principles is the latter. Making this evaluation and selection is what voting is all about and always has been. We very, very rarely get our idea of a perfect candidate to vote for.

So the real question for Ruble is, are you going to vote for what's really in your own best interests, then keep working to bend things your way next time around?

Paul was not my first choice although, I have always thought that he was the best choice. I was firmly behind Herman Cain mainly because he could have soundly beaten Obama and he might have done some good despite having some baggage, ie, his time with the Fed.

My best interests are represented by Gary Johnson and that is who I will vote for and hopefully more of you will join me because I don't think Romney can beat Obama. No body likes him, no enthusiasm for him and 50% of Americans are on the public dole. Who will these people vote for?

G19G20
08-12-2012, 19:19
Paul Ryan begging Congress to pass TARP

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RyJBZYz858M

G19G20
08-12-2012, 19:26
http://www.rlc.org/2012/08/11/the-paul-ryan-record/


Paul Ryan on Bailouts and Government Stimuli
-Voted YES on TARP (2008)
-Voted YES on Economic Stimulus HR 5140 (2008)
-Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
-Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)

Paul Ryan on Entitlement Programs
-Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)
-Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers. (Jun 2006)
-Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Oct 2008)
-Voted YES on Head Start Act (2007)

Paul Ryan on Education
Rep. Ryan went along with the Bush Administration in supporting more federal involvement in education. This is contrary to the traditional Republican position, which included support for abolition of the Department of Education and decreasing federal involvement in education.
-Voted YES on No Child Left Behind Act (2001)

Paul Ryan on Civil Liberties
-Voted YES on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists. (Feb 2005)
-Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
-Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)

Paul Ryan on War and Intervention Abroad
-Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)
-Voted YES on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Apr 2003)
-Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
-Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)

Congressman Ryan supports the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, federal bailouts, increased federal involvement in education, unconstitutional and undeclared wars, Medicare Part D (a multi trillion dollar unfunded liability), stimulus spending, and foreign aid.

According to Michelle Malkin in 2009, “[Paul Ryan] gave one of the most hysterical speeches in the rush to pass TARP last fall; voted for the auto bailout; and voted with the Barney Frank-Nancy Pelosi AIG bonus-bashing stampede. Milwaukee blogger Nick Schweitzer wrote: ‘He ought to be apologizing for his previous votes, not pretending he was being responsible the entire time, but I don’t see one bit of regret for what he did previously. And I’ll be damned if I’m going to let him get away with it’.”

Congressman Ryan: if you don’t like debt, stop voting for debt.

This is who a Tea Party voter should coalesce behind? REALLY?

Oops, almost forgot the part where he voted for NDAA, CISPA, DOMA, expanding Presidential appointments without Senate oversight, etc etc. This guy is the definition of a big government RINO.

countrygun
08-12-2012, 19:36
Hey the paulbot tetherball is back, going to give us some more of his misinformation.

Let's start a pool on how many things he will get wrong this time. (or should I say how many wrong things his handlers feed him and he spews).

G19G20
08-12-2012, 19:39
Hey the paulbot tetherball is back, going to give us some more of his misinformation.

Let's start a pool on how many things he will get wrong this time. (or should I say how many wrong things his handlers feed him and he spews).

Go for it. What's inaccurate about my two posts above? That is Ryan's record on major bills. Tell us what's inaccurate about it! Wow us!

JFrame
08-12-2012, 19:45
Hey... I was a fork truck operator for THREE YEARS! I guess that means I am qualified!! :woohoo:


Q -- I believe that qualifies you to be Emperor of the Universe...! :notworthy:


.

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 19:47
http://www.rlc.org/2012/08/11/the-paul-ryan-record/



This is who a Tea Party voter should coalesce behind? REALLY?

Oops, almost forgot the part where he voted for NDAA, CISPA, DOMA, expanding Presidential appointments without Senate oversight, etc etc. This guy is the definition of a big government RINO.

Hey man, you can't be quoting facts from that crackpot republican site. :rofl:

QNman
08-12-2012, 19:58
Paul was not my first choice although, I have always thought that he was the best choice. I was firmly behind Herman Cain mainly because he could have soundly beaten Obama and he might have done some good despite having some baggage, ie, his time with the Fed.

My best interests are represented by Gary Johnson and that is who I will vote for and hopefully more of you will join me because I don't think Romney can beat Obama. No body likes him, no enthusiasm for him and 50% of Americans are on the public dole. Who will these people vote for?

I agree 100% with the first paragraph, and disagree with the second the same amount. I think Romney CAN beat Obama... I'm just not sure he will. It will be a close race, and the close ones seem to favor the Chicago-style machine.

tgmr05
08-12-2012, 20:36
My best interests are represented by Gary Johnson and that is who I will vote for and hopefully more of you will join me because I don't think Romney can beat Obama. No body likes him, no enthusiasm for him and 50% of Americans are on the public dole. Who will these people vote for?

Romney cannot beat Obama but Gary Johnson can???? Maybe if he got selected by one of the two major parties, otherwise a vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama..... Is that what you want, 4 more years?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 20:45
Romney cannot beat Obama but Gary Johnson can???? Maybe if he got selected by one of the two major parties, otherwise a vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama..... Is that what you want, 4 more years?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Yeah, if the rest of you vote for him too. Don't make the same mistake as the fools that voted for HW over Perot.

countrygun
08-12-2012, 20:51
Yeah, if the rest of you vote for him too. Don't make the same mistake as the fools that voted for HW over Perot.


I see it now,

The majority in that election were "fools"

The majority in this primary are "Statists"

and it is up to you, an "elitist" minority to tell the people what they need.




You scare me as much as Obama and his minions.

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 21:05
I see it now,

The majority in that election were "fools"

The majority in this primary are "Statists"

and it is up to you, an "elitist" minority to tell the people what they need.




You scare me as much as Obama and his minions.

You call me an elitist with all that elitist crap that you post? :rofl:

But to answer your question, yes. The fools voted for HW and got Clinton elected.

jakebrake
08-12-2012, 21:10
Yeah, if the rest of you vote for him too. Don't make the same mistake as the fools that voted for HW over Perot.

and, those of us that voted perot (twice) over hw and got clinton elected?

or voted perot over dole(like i said...twice), and the fat allley cat re-elected?

countrygun
08-12-2012, 21:20
and, those of us that voted perot (twice) over hw and got clinton elected?

or voted perot over dole(like i said...twice), and the fat allley cat re-elected?


Now... there you go again...trying to speak from experience. what do you know? You are not one of the divinely enlightened.

This is completely different............ it is spelled P*A*U*L not P*E*R*O*T

Ruble Noon
08-12-2012, 21:25
and, those of us that voted perot (twice) over hw and got clinton elected?

or voted perot over dole(like i said...twice), and the fat allley cat re-elected?

You got that backwards. The people that voted for HW got Clinton elected. To anyone paying attention at the time it was obvious that HW was on the way out but, alas, the fools voted for him anyhow because they were afraid to step outside the excepted norm of the two party system.

QNman
08-12-2012, 21:30
and, those of us that voted perot (twice) over hw and got clinton elected?

or voted perot over dole(like i said...twice), and the fat allley cat re-elected?

Yes. Like it or not, that is exactly what we did. The "message" wasn't received - and never will be.

tgmr05
08-12-2012, 21:45
Yeah, if the rest of you vote for him too. Don't make the same mistake as the fools that voted for HW over Perot.

Now that is telling, the fools were the ones voting HW..... Everyone else was not a fool, and elected the wise choice by not voting HW. Great logic....

In the coming election, based on the reality of our current two party system, not voting for Romney is a vote for Obama. The left knows it, and uses it to their advantage. There will be many votes for Obama by folks who do not completely agree with him, but know the reality of voting for the one closest to their ideology. They will not help the opposition by trying some third party divisive tactic. They stand behind their best choice. The extreme left stomachs Obama to help them get closer to their objectives.

Some of this third party stuff comes from the left. They know it is one of their only hopes of winning, splitting the opposition....


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

tgmr05
08-12-2012, 21:49
The tea party is showing how to change things INSIDE the two party system, instead of falling into the trap of helping the opposition by trying to change the system entirely. Unless you have support from BOTH sides, any third party simply helps the opposition....


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

countrygun
08-12-2012, 21:54
The tea party is showing how to change things INSIDE the two party system, instead of falling into the trap of helping the opposition by trying to change the system entirely. Unless you have support from BOTH sides, any third party simply helps the opposition....


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


It seems obvious to the rational folks.

the Democrats want Obama reelected.

the paulbots are going to help them

You don't need a stick-figure drawing to see the reacharound.

beforeobamabans
08-13-2012, 00:55
I find myself agreeing whole-heartedly with the Libertarians here..... Ruble, The Machinist, barbedwiresmile, etc., etc. The Statist Monster is growing beyond control of 'we the people'. Every facet of day-to-day life is governed by so many laws and rules and permits and licenses that we will never be able to get control of this Beast.

However.............. I've thought long and hard about this election year. All of the posts stating the Republican ticket is not conservative are correct. I was not going to support the outrageous, liberal, big-government Romney in any way. The addition of Ryan has softened me a bit, although he supported many entitlement and bailout spending bills. I've come to the conclusion that I will go vote for them in November. The thought of another 4 years of the squatter is just too much to endure. You conservatives will have to forgive me, but I believe that it's the right thing to do, at least for this particular election year. So it is written, so it shall be done. Forgive me my lack of principle.

I like your post except for the very last sentence. You voting for Romney/Ryan has nothing to do with a lack of principle on your part. You did not define the ballot for November. In fact, I would argue that you are applying your principles to make the choice that is closest to them. That choice may not be real close, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the other option as you point out. Your reasoning is the rational path.

Flying-Dutchman
08-13-2012, 01:01
Look at the bright side, a Paul made it onto the ticket. It's progress.
Ryan Paul, Randís younger brother?:rofl:

TangoFoxtrot
08-13-2012, 04:18
LOL ...Republicans don't have game on this pick!

eracer
08-13-2012, 04:46
You have to be an idiot or an immature, inexperienced young voter to not see how the "libertarians" have tried to redefine "conservative" into some half-breed liberal bastige position.

Libertarian is the true "redefined Neo-con", they are "liberal-lites"
I love labels. They use so many letters, yet say so little.

barbedwiresmile
08-13-2012, 04:50
http://www.rlc.org/2012/08/11/the-paul-ryan-record/
.

Nobody cares. What's important is that he has an 'R' next to his name. The fact that he's a liar with a big government voting record is completely irrelevant.

barbedwiresmile
08-13-2012, 05:00
Considering that it's a party, and not just a political philosophy, one that works for the party. I'd also like to see the Republicans move toward the austerity measures we need.

Austerity measures? Scroll down within this link for a nice visual of the Obama vs Ryan budgets:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-mitt-romneys-selection-paul-ryan-sign-desperation

Further, while I think I know what you mean by 'austerity', it is worth nothing that this term has taken on a certain connotation based on it's use and manifestation in Europe. 'Austerity' is simply indirect TARP: private bond holders are bailed out by public funds - ie: tax payers. Taxes are raised to a growth-choking rate and the target country becomes a fiefdom, a tax plantation, for politically connected financial interests who are shielded from the market repercussions of their investment decisions. But like Americans, Europeans also choose to vote for these crooks so I suppose they deserve it.

JFrame
08-13-2012, 05:11
I like your post except for the very last sentence. You voting for Romney/Ryan has nothing to do with a lack of principle on your part. You did not define the ballot for November. In fact, I would argue that you are applying your principles to make the choice that is closest to them. That choice may not be real close, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the other option as you point out. Your reasoning is the rational path.


+1

I was trying to compose an appropriate post in response to Snerd's, and couldn't come up with the words. You did handsomely. :cool:


.

The Machinist
08-13-2012, 05:25
Excellent article you linked to, BWS.

Romney and Ryan will lose in November and the image of the heartless Conservative killing granny will resonate with America, the tragedy of course is that neither Ryan or Romney are willing to actually cut anything! The tragedy will become even more amusing as we will witness a nasty and partisan fight further dividing Americans as they fight and defend differing policies with the exact same results.

Ruble Noon
08-13-2012, 05:58
Now that is telling, the fools were the ones voting HW.....

Them and the ones that cast a vote for Clinton.

tgmr05
08-13-2012, 07:00
Them and the ones that cast a vote for Clinton.

Now you seem to begin to grasp reality, but not quite completely. The only ones fooled, were the ones voting for Clinton, and those that were helping Clinton by trying to somehow change our political system from the outside, by splitting ONE of the two parties up....

Does anyone really think not having a D or R beside their name makes them somehow immune to the corruption in govt? That somehow they will master the art of working inside govt and change things, when they are 'outsiders' to the whole process?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

tgmr05
08-13-2012, 07:04
Nobody cares. What's important is that he has an 'R' next to his name. The fact that he's a liar with a big government voting record is completely irrelevant.

What is truly important, is picking the best choice from the TWO main choices, in our current TWO party system. Are you saying Obama is a better choice than Romney?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Ruble Noon
08-13-2012, 07:37
Now you seem to begin to grasp reality, but not quite completely. The only ones fooled, were the ones voting for Clinton, and those that were helping Clinton by trying to somehow change our political system from the outside, by splitting ONE of the two parties up....

Does anyone really think not having a D or R beside their name makes them somehow immune to the corruption in govt? That somehow they will master the art of working inside govt and change things, when they are 'outsiders' to the whole process?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

The reality at the time was that HW Bush would not be reelected. The race was between Perot and Clinton. Fools, scared to step outside their box, voted in vain for Bush.

JFrame
08-13-2012, 07:48
The reality at the time was that HW Bush would not be reelected. The race was between Perot and Clinton. Fools, scared to step outside their box, voted in vain for Bush.

Okay -- ya absolutely lost me on that one, Ruble -- could you explain how you come up with that? Thanks... :dunno:

......................Clinton........H.W. Bush.......Perot
Popular vote..44,909,806....39,104,550.....19,743,821
Percentage......43.0%........37.5%............18.9%


.

Ruble Noon
08-13-2012, 07:57
Okay -- ya absolutely lost me on that one, Ruble -- could you explain how you come up with that? Thanks... :dunno:

......................Clinton........H.W. Bush.......Perot
Popular vote..44,909,806....39,104,550.....19,743,821
Percentage......43.0%........37.5%............18.9%


.

Easy, there was a large faction that would not vote for Bush and were determined to vote for Perot. It was sizable enough group to insure that Bush would not be reelected so, voting for Bush was an exercise in futility.

ChuteTheMall
08-13-2012, 07:59
There is only one effective way to vote against Obama, and it doesn't include any third party delusions.

JFrame
08-13-2012, 08:04
Easy, there was a large faction that would not vote for Bush and were determined to vote for Perot. It was sizable enough group to insure that Bush would not be reelected so, voting for Bush was an exercise in futility.


So the 38% that voted for H.W. had to come around to the way the 19% that were Perot people felt?

You know I love ya, man (in a totally platonic sense, of course!), but I have a hard time wrapping myself around that rationale...Try as I might, it's just not working for me... :frown:


.


.

Cavalry Doc
08-13-2012, 08:52
The "no1butpaul" crowd is still here?

Better get ready for that third party run, if he runs. Maybe he'll just endorse third party candidates again without running.

tgmr05
08-13-2012, 09:48
The reality at the time was that HW Bush would not be reelected. The race was between Perot and Clinton. Fools, scared to step outside their box, voted in vain for Bush.

Oh, right, the vote count proved that..... Perot creamed HW. No, wait...

Someone needs to step outside the bubble....

tgmr05
08-13-2012, 10:01
The reality the third party folks need to come to terms with is simple. We have a two party system, and there are two main candidates in this election. Pick one, get behind them, and vote for them.

You want change, become PART of one of them, and change them from the inside. Both main parties are comprised of smaller groups. BOTH. There used to be conservative democrats, and there most definitely are liberal republicans.... There are definitely MANY small groups in the democrat party, and republican party. Join one, and make your voice heard. Compromise, etc. But bring your core values to one or the other..

You need to pick one, in this election, and vote for one. Not voting Romney is a vote for Obama, BUT not voting Obama can actually be a vote for Obama. The question you need to seriously ask yourselves, is do you really want to help Obama????

Work inside the system we have, instead of being FOOLED into helping the opposition....

Goaltender66
08-13-2012, 10:34
You got that backwards. The people that voted for HW got Clinton elected. To anyone paying attention at the time it was obvious that HW was on the way out but, alas, the fools voted for him anyhow because they were afraid to step outside the excepted norm of the two party system.

I'm not sure how you get there.

Here's a contemporaneous news report (1992):

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/29/us/the-1992-campaign-ross-perot-nominees-camps-make-their-cases-to-perot-backers.html?pagewanted=all

In it, the author notes:

An ABC News-Washinton Post Poll released today showed that with Mr. Perot in the race, Mr. Clinton's lead over Mr. Bush would shrink to almost a statistical dead heat. The survey showed Mr. Clinton with 44 percent, Mr. Bush with 39 percent and 14 percent for Mr. Perot. The poll of 616 likely voters, conducted Sept. 23 to 27, had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. It showed Mr. Clinton's lead had dropped dramatically over the last week.

Other polls taken within the last several days, all with smaller margins of sampling error, showed a smaller effect if Perot were to re-enter the race. When averaged, they gave Mr. Clinton 46 percent, Mr. Bush 33 percent and Mr. Perot 13 percent.


In other words, polling suggested that Perot was stealing support from Clinton.

As for the idea that Perot was some kind of Bush alternative, well...again from 1992:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/28/opinion/the-democrats-should-adopt-perot.html

For the record, Mr. Perot says he's an independent. By that he only means he has supported candidates of both parties. But his positions on specific issues -- abortion, gay rights, taxes, the deficit, free trade, America's role in the world -- make it clear that he's a Democrat. Granted, he's the kind of Democrat we haven't seen in a while, in the mold of Lyndon Johnson and Henry Jackson, but that's precisely the candidate the Democrats need and that their primary process never seems to be able to produce.

I don't think there was much if anything in Perot's platform that would have appealed to Republicans at the time. My sense is that Perot's showing was the result of protest voting brought on by the "read my lips" fiasco.

The Machinist
08-13-2012, 16:57
The reality the third party folks need to come to terms with is simple. We have a two party system, and there are two main candidates in this election. Pick one, get behind them, and vote for them.
What if I refuse? What if I'm tired of begging these thieves for a little bit of what they took from me? What if my pride won't allow me to grovel before these con men?

You want change, become PART of one of them, and change them from the inside.
That's just silly. Political change doesn't work this way. Both parties are bought and paid for, and both parties work to cement their power, and to pay off the people who got them into office. People like you and I don't factor into that equation.

tgmr05
08-13-2012, 19:13
What if I refuse? What if I'm tired of begging these thieves for a little bit of what they took from me? What if my pride won't allow me to grovel before these con men?


That's just silly. Political change doesn't work this way. Both parties are bought and paid for, and both parties work to cement their power, and to pay off the people who got them into office. People like you and I don't factor into that equation.

Not everybody votes, and not everybody takes part in the American process. It is a free country, you can do as you please, and you are free to go elsewhere, if you really cannot stand it.

The reality is this, it is hard work to change things from the inside, and it is even harder to start all over again (though most simply sit around whining about the state of things). Again, America is a free country, so you can choose to participate, or not...


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Cavalry Doc
08-13-2012, 19:22
What if I refuse? What if I'm tired of begging these thieves for a little bit of what they took from me? What if my pride won't allow me to grovel before these con men?


That's just silly. Political change doesn't work this way. Both parties are bought and paid for, and both parties work to cement their power, and to pay off the people who got them into office. People like you and I don't factor into that equation.

That's ok. Lots of people will opt out. Some will vote, some won't. Most of us will be in the game, voting to help or hurt one of the only two viable candidates left.

It's still your right to do or not do whatever you want.

QNman
08-13-2012, 21:21
I'm not sure how you get there.

Here's a contemporaneous news report (1992):

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/29/us/the-1992-campaign-ross-perot-nominees-camps-make-their-cases-to-perot-backers.html?pagewanted=all

In it, the author notes:



In other words, polling suggested that Perot was stealing support from Clinton.

As for the idea that Perot was some kind of Bush alternative, well...again from 1992:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/28/opinion/the-democrats-should-adopt-perot.html



I don't think there was much if anything in Perot's platform that would have appealed to Republicans at the time. My sense is that Perot's showing was the result of protest voting brought on by the "read my lips" fiasco.

Perhaps it seems that Perot was stealing votes from Clinton, when using polling data and opinion pieces from the NY Times. But being one of the Perot voters myself, and knowing many friends who were the same, Clinton was never an option.

Perot was many things, but a rival to Clinton was not one of them.

And, yes, the whole "read my lips" thing was a big deal... Not specifically because he broke his word, but in large part because he raised taxes.

countrygun
08-13-2012, 21:24
Perhaps it seems that Perot was stealing votes from Clinton, when using polling data and opinion pieces from the NY Times. But being one of the Perot voters myself, and knowing many friends who were the same, Clinton was never an option.

Perot was many things, but a rival to Clinton was not one of them.

And, yes, the whole "read my lips" thing was a big deal... Not specifically because he broke his word, but in large part because he raised taxes.


Perot got a fair amount of votes out of Oregon and it wasn't from the Clinton libs in the valley.

QNman
08-13-2012, 21:33
Perot got a fair amount of votes out of Oregon and it wasn't from the Clinton libs in the valley.

His key attribute was fiscal restraint. Hardly a Clinton talking point.