Based on the last election the worst person for the job will probably get elected - so Huckabee it is.Quoting shaun (view post)
Based on the last election the worst person for the job will probably get elected - so Huckabee it is.
Actually, if I were to vote in the republican primary, it'd probably be for McCain. Right now he seems the least slimy of all the republicans.
I still think McCain is slimy.
"Modern weapons can defend freedom, civilization, and life only by annihilating them. Security in military language means the ability to do away with the Earth."
-Ivan Illich, Deschooling Society
due to the massive amount of Ron Paul propaganda littering my town i checked out his webpage and listened to a few of his positions and he makes George W. Bush look like Ralph Nader.
the only person on either platform i could see possibly voting for would be Obama and i'm not too impressed with him either.
Ron Paul's domestic policy is completely right wing, but his foreign policy seems quite reasonable to me.
Yeah exactly, but I figure he won't be able to enact much of his domestic policy (even if Congress is Republican controlled which it probably won't be) - but his foreign policy should work.
People love Ron Paul for his non-interventionist stance on foreign affairs but I'd bet most of those supporters would be less likely to support him withdrawing from and ceasing funding of organizations that he believes usurp US sovereignty like the UN and NATO. He also grades an F from darfurscores.org for voted aid to the region.
You have to give him credit for being consistent at the very least.
"Abortion on demand is no doubt the most serious sociopolitical problem of our age. The lack of respect for life that permits abortion significantly contributes to our violent culture and our careless attitude toward liberty"-Ron Paul
Michael Moore weighs in.
"And then there's John Edwards.It's hard to get past the hair, isn't it? But once you do -- and recently I have chosen to try -- you find a man who is out to take on the wealthy and powerful who have made life so miserable for so many. A candidate who says things like this: "I absolutely believe to my soul that this corporate greed and corporate power has an ironclad hold on our democracy." Whoa. We haven't heard anyone talk like that in a while, at least not anyone who is near the top of the polls. I suspect this is why Edwards is doing so well in Iowa, even though he has nowhere near the stash of cash the other two have. He won't take the big checks from the corporate PACs, and he is alone among the top three candidates in agreeing to limit his spending and be publicly funded. He has said, point-blank, that he's going after the drug companies and the oil companies and anyone else who is messing with the American worker. The media clearly find him to be a threat, probably because he will go after their monopolistic power, too. This is Roosevelt/Truman kind of talk. That's why it's resonating with people in Iowa, even though he doesn't get the attention Obama and Hillary get -- and that lack of coverage may cost him the first place spot in Iowa."
The severed arm perfectly acquitted itself, because of the simplicity of its wishes and its total lack of doubt.
"I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator." - Ron Paul
that's two quotes that show that this guy is not for me.
Well, I'll cast the lone vote for Clinton.
Oh, and I just found something that expresses a lot the reasons why:
Memories of the Future
"Criticism can be monumentally creative, of course, at times highly artistic, highly personal. But it rarely relates to the work of art being assessed. It is an expression of the critic's own subjectivity." -Joyce Carol Oates, Journals
Can I bypass all this and just vote Eric B. for president?
"Independent voters are a growing political force in Arizona, but their influence falls short of being able to cast a ballot in the presidential primary.
A record 28 percent of the state's registered voters are independents, meaning they belong to no party recognized by the state.
By law, no independents can vote on Feb. 5 in the state's Presidential Preference Election, which determines the number of delegates each candidate receives in the nomination races. "
i'm an independant and this is why are political system is ridiculous.
The mere idea of Hillary Clinton as the "agent of change" is simply hilarious.
The severed arm perfectly acquitted itself, because of the simplicity of its wishes and its total lack of doubt.
I'd like to charlie horse anyone who votes based the endorsement of Oprah or Michael Moore.
You think it's ridiculous that a political party only wants its members voting on who it chooses to be its presidential candidate?
I think that's one of the few sane things about our electoral process.
Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich. Paul seems to be getting dissed by the major media and might not have much momentum when the primary gets here, so I'd probably go with McCain in that case.
Oh dear. There is no way I could ever in good conscience vote for anyone who truly believes that.
Last 10 Movies Seen
(90+ = canonical, 80-89 = brilliant, 70-79 = strongly recommended, 60-69 = good, 50-59 = mixed, 40-49 = below average with some good points, 30-39 = poor, 20-29 = bad, 10-19 = terrible, 0-9 = soul-crushingly inept in every way)
Run (2020) 64
The Whistlers (2019) 55
Pawn (2020) 62
Matilda (1996) 37
The Town that Dreaded Sundown (1976) 61
Moby Dick (2011) 50
Soul (2020) 64
Heroic Duo (2003) 55
A Moment of Romance (1990) 61
As Tears Go By (1988) 65
Stuff at Letterboxd
Listening Habits at LastFM
Well, then there's no one left to vote for.
I really don't see why that should have anything to do with one's decision to vote. Shouldn't you be looking at the issues that will actually affect the country and policy? Ron Paul may be a conservative Christian (like the majority of the country and the other candidates), and he may be forthright and unabashed in his views (as he is on everything else), but that has no bearing on what he would actually do as President. It's like saying I'm not going to vote for Hillary because she's a woman.
The severed arm perfectly acquitted itself, because of the simplicity of its wishes and its total lack of doubt.
The idea that a persons's faith, and particularly his or her public relationship with it, is comparable to one's skin, gender, or height strikes me as silly. I'm wary of a candidate who happily admits both that what we have is not a society overseen by people, but by God, and that our candidate is here to enforce God's will as he perceives it. We live in a society goverened by and for the people. Putting this in the context of the previous quote aobut abortion is enough to get my social libertarian side a little riled up and happy that Paul doesn't stand a chance in hell.
At least he's honest about his faith and doesn't mind expressing it. I'd rather have that than someone who uses his "faith and beliefs" to generate votes from Christians, only to avoid using the word God and faith any other time for fear of people (much like yourself) deciding they are too strong in their faith and not voting for them for that reason alone.
I think trans's objection is more in Paul's seeming denial of man's hand in our society. I want my governors to believe that man has the capacity to control his world.
I have no problem with people being religious. But if they're stating their religious views as part of their campaign, and I detect something in that belief that seems as if it'll influence the way they serve in a way that I don't want, then I object to it.
Also, the "faith and belief" and values shtick that nearly every other candidate pulls makes me sick, as well, though in a different way.
Except that second part is not what Ron Paul thinks. He is there to enforce the Constitution, which is a document written specifically in order to restrain government, to preserve personal liberty (including religious freedom) and allow for self-governance.
The severed arm perfectly acquitted itself, because of the simplicity of its wishes and its total lack of doubt.
Nothing he says contradicts this. He's saying that God gave us life. Nothing more. He professes that he's a Christians, and Christians don't believe that God controls the universe. They believe in free will. He's saying that we control the world and the freedom that God gave us.
This.
Nothing Ron Paul has done in our government suggests that he's guided in his decisions by God. He's a strict Constitutionalist when it comes to US policy.
Anyone remember Constantinople? God helped him make decisions.
Posting Permissions
forum
Reply With Quote