Romney chooses Ryan

[hacksawfg]

This is what kills me about this whole argument. The Romney supporters justify vote for the lesser of two evils by the "wait 'til next time, the GOP will field a better candidate, PROMISE." Apparently that's how we keep the momentum for change going.

If you keep putting out a crap product every year, but people have to buy it because it's "the only realistic option," why would you ever make it better? Do you honestly believe if Americans keep buying the crap the two parties shovel onto us, they will EVER change?! Of course, the mainstream media will continue to marginalize third party candidates as fringe because they're not getting the numbers (wonder why). But what's the worst that could happen by Americans voting for the lesser of two evils/he's not the other guy method (hint - Clinton, 8 years of Bush - and yeah, I voted for him TWICE because he wasn't the other guy so there, and Obama).

The ironic thing to me is so many people on this board get all bent out of shape if a store won't let them OC, or carry at all, that they refuse to even enter that store because they feel it compromises their rights, beliefs, safety, etc. I'm venturing that some of these same people want those of us trying to make a real change in this country back towards the principles of liberty, freedom, and some semblance of privacy in our lives to compromise and vote for Romney.

So with this in mind, I'll offer this choice to those of you. If you're a Romney supporter who wants me to change my vote, you compromise first and start leaving your guns in your car/house and start patronizing the stores, restaurants, etc. that don't allow firearms on the premises again. Do that (no lying), and I'll vote for Romney. If Romney is elected though, you have to continue that for the entirety of his term(s), because if I'm going to sell out trying to actually change things, you should get to feel just as secure as I will with Romney/Obama in office.

 

[theweakerbrother]

Ever since people have been voting for psuedo-conservatives to elect a real one, have they ever been successful in doing so or are presidents getting incrementally/exponentially worse?

 

[NYFelon]

worse.

 

[hornadylnl]

Ever since people have been voting for psuedo-conservatives to elect a real one, have they ever been successful in doing so or are presidents getting incrementally/exponentially worse?

Reagan
Bush Sr.
Dole
Bush Jr.
McCain
Romney

You decide.

 

[theweakerbrother]

Oh, I know my answer. You know my answer, too, hornady.

 

[hornadylnl]

Tell me again why we should support Romney and the Republican Party? Are they really any better than The Illegal President?

RNC: Ron Paul delegates not welcome in Tampa

Just read through what the Republicans are doing to maintain their control of this party. Do you really think these people will defend the Constitution or the republic? Does this not make it very clear that they are only concerned about maintaining their power and will continue the march toward totalitarianism, socialism and the destruction of the republic?

Can anyone still vote for Romney and think we will have better government than we currently have?

Seriously?

Oh, I know my answer. You know my answer, too, hornady.

There's always next election. That's why us third party guys must work within one of the 2 major parties to effect change. The repubs are so receptive to us, we should have no problems producing a better candidate in 2016.

Edited. I quoted the wrong post for my top quote.

 

[jamil]

Can someone answer how voting for someone that YOU don't even know that much about, for not much more reason than that he has an "L" in front of his name, is going to usher in a new age of abundant concervative candidates? And, can the answer not involve smoke and mirrors?

I fear that even if you could pull that off, whatever "establishment" that creates would devolve into what we already have or worse. Wheather it's croney capitalism or croney socialism, croney seems to be a common genetic feature.

 

[rambone]

I think a Romney election does lots of damage to the GOP, and no perceivable good for the country. Once the neocons are back in charge churning out more fascist laws and aggressive wars, the country will be rightfully upset and you can expect Democrats to get a resurgence in Congress in 2014. Like clockwork.

 

[hacksawfg]

I think a Romney election does lots of damage to the GOP, and no perceivable good for the country. Once the neocons are back in charge churning out more fascist laws and aggressive wars, the country will be rightfully upset and you can expect Democrats to get a resurgence in Congress in 2014. Like clockwork.

Of course, that's how we got Clinton (hey, the economy sucks and I'm not Bush), Bush ("hey, do you really want four to eight more years of Clinton" in 2000, then "I'm gonna keep 'Murica safe" in 2004 - yes, I bought it HLS ) and Obama ("hey, the economy sucks and I'm not Bush"). Now instead of supporting a candidate running a campaign based on NEW ideas to get America back to being a free country, we get another "hey the economy sucks, and I'm not the other guy," candidate.

It will never change because unfortunately it WORKS as long as people perpetuate it. If the GOP actually put forth a candidate who is actually for freedom instead of someone who just says he is because he needs to in order to get elected, I might actually go back.

 

[buckstopshere]

Can someone answer how voting for someone that YOU don't even know that much about, for not much more reason than that he has an "L" in front of his name, is going to usher in a new age of abundant concervative candidates? And, can the answer not involve smoke and mirrors?

I fear that even if you could pull that off, whatever "establishment" that creates would devolve into what we already have or worse. Wheather it's croney capitalism or croney socialism, croney seems to be a common genetic feature.

It's not hard to research a candidate. Gary Johnson has a solid record of governing in new mexico, a much, much more "conservative" record than Romney as governor of Mass.

Not sure I'm tracking on the point you're making.

 

[Yup!]

So with this in mind, I'll offer this choice to those of you. If you're a Romney supporter who wants me to change my vote, you compromise first and start leaving your guns in your car/house and start patronizing the stores, restaurants, etc. that don't allow firearms on the premises again. Do that (no lying), and I'll vote for Romney. If Romney is elected though, you have to continue that for the entirety of his term(s), because if I'm going to sell out trying to actually change things, you should get to feel just as secure as I will with Romney/Obama in office.

One of the most fought for rights in America is the right to vote. It is something that you should take pretty seriously. I've read a lot of post here lately, and I do not recall seeing one that said "You MUST Vote for.." merely there were posts offering reasons to support or discredit a vote for a particular candidate. These are done in attempt to educate the population on the choices and subsequent consequences of said choices.

Your vote, is your vote. It can not be sold, it can not be bartered. It saddens me that you take this basic right and cheapen it by offering to sell out. I wonder if your reasoning to sell out, is because you already know that your vote for Johnson will likely have no effect on the Presidential Race, and therefore you'd prefer to capitalize on it, admittedly, not financially. Perhaps you own a business that is labeled "Gun Free" and are working to gain more business, I dunno.

In any event, not only are you potentially in violation of Federal and State laws by offering up your vote in exchange for business, but you are also in violation of the INGO T&C. "You are authorized to use the Site and its services only if you agree to abide by these Terms and all applicable laws. If you do NOT accept the Terms, then please discontinue your use of the Site immediately." - Morally you are in violation of so much more.

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you have to accept responsibility for your vote, and if you are unable to come to grips with the notion that your candidate is not polling high enough to be considered a potential winner in the election, you can not simply throw in the towel and claim "Not My Fault".

Stand up, do the research, find that candidate that you wish to have elected, and go vote for him and her. Your country needs you.

US Code 18 597

 

[firehawk1]

This is what kills me about this whole argument. The Romney supporters justify vote for the lesser of two evils by the "wait 'til next time, the GOP will field a better candidate, PROMISE." Apparently that's how we keep the momentum for change going.

If you keep putting out a crap product every year, but people have to buy it because it's "the only realistic option," why would you ever make it better? Do you honestly believe if Americans keep buying the crap the two parties shovel onto us, they will EVER change?! Of course, the mainstream media will continue to marginalize third party candidates as fringe because they're not getting the numbers (wonder why). But what's the worst that could happen by Americans voting for the lesser of two evils/he's not the other guy method (hint - Clinton, 8 years of Bush - and yeah, I voted for him TWICE because he wasn't the other guy so there, and Obama).

The ironic thing to me is so many people on this board get all bent out of shape if a store won't let them OC, or carry at all, that they refuse to even enter that store because they feel it compromises their rights, beliefs, safety, etc. I'm venturing that some of these same people want those of us trying to make a real change in this country back towards the principles of liberty, freedom, and some semblance of privacy in our lives to compromise and vote for Romney.

So with this in mind, I'll offer this choice to those of you. If you're a Romney supporter who wants me to change my vote, you compromise first and start leaving your guns in your car/house and start patronizing the stores, restaurants, etc. that don't allow firearms on the premises again. Do that (no lying), and I'll vote for Romney. If Romney is elected though, you have to continue that for the entirety of his term(s), because if I'm going to sell out trying to actually change things, you should get to feel just as secure as I will with Romney/Obama in office.

Black and white, all or nothing huh? Enjoy more of nothing in November, and beating your head against the wall over people who don't see things quite the same as you.

This "logic" or lack there of astounds me. Say you're starving and someone offers you a cracker. To follow your logic you would say HELL no, steak and baked potato or I want nothing, AND then calling the one who offered you the cracker a fool. Kind of basackwards isn't it?

 

[hornadylnl]

Black and white, all or nothing huh? Enjoy more of nothing in November, and beating your head against the wall over people who don't see things quite the same as you.

This "logic" or lack there of astounds me. Say you're starving and someone offers you a cracker. To follow your logic you would say HELL no, steak and baked potato or I want nothing, AND then calling the one who offered you the cracker a fool. Kind of basackwards isn't it?

Your analogy would be much better if your cracker was laced with cyanide.

 

[mrjarrell]

Can someone answer how voting for someone that YOU don't even know that much about, for not much more reason than that he has an "L" in front of his name, is going to usher in a new age of abundant concervative candidates?

What makes you think that 3rd party voters don't know anything about their chosen candidates? I'd be willing to bet good money that they know more about their choices than you do about yours. I wouldn't support a candidate I knew nothing about. Neither would most of the people I know that vote for L's or others. And we don't tend to ignore their records for the sake of convenience, like some voters. Shoot, last election I voted for None of the Above for president. Wouldn't vote for Barr, McCain or Obama. Still feel good about my choice. This time around I get to vote for someone with a proven track record, sound principles and a plan I can mostly agree with. And, I know a good bit about his background and history, due to his openness. Can you say the same?

 

[hacksawfg]

One of the most fought for rights in America is the right to vote. It is something that you should take pretty seriously. I've read a lot of post here lately, and I do not recall seeing one that said "You MUST Vote for.." merely there were posts offering reasons to support or discredit a vote for a particular candidate. These are done in attempt to educate the population on the choices and subsequent consequences of said choices.

Your vote, is your vote. It can not be sold, it can not be bartered. It saddens me that you take this basic right and cheapen it by offering to sell out. I wonder if your reasoning to sell out, is because you already know that your vote for Johnson will likely have no effect on the Presidential Race, and therefore you'd prefer to capitalize on it, admittedly, not financially. Perhaps you own a business that is labeled "Gun Free" and are working to gain more business, I dunno.

In any event, not only are you potentially in violation of Federal and State laws by offering up your vote in exchange for business, but you are also in violation of the INGO T&C. "You are authorized to use the Site and its services only if you agree to abide by these Terms and all applicable laws. If you do NOT accept the Terms, then please discontinue your use of the Site immediately." - Morally you are in violation of so much more.

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you have to accept responsibility for your vote, and if you are unable to come to grips with the notion that your candidate is not polling high enough to be considered a potential winner in the election, you can not simply throw in the towel and claim "Not My Fault".

Stand up, do the research, find that candidate that you wish to have elected, and go vote for him and her. Your country needs you.

US Code 18 597

Uh, OK

I guess trying to make a point about people who say "if you don't vote for Romney you're just an Obama supporter, so compromise your principles to get him out" went right over your head. But, since you did say you didn't mind an assault weapons ban on INGO, I'll just take it as not understanding completely the average INGO member. Maybe you think I shouldn't exercise my freedom of speech and NOT challenge others when the "just get Obama out" crowd says that I'm EEEEEVVVVILLLL because I'm voting third party. I'm 100% sure nobody here would even consider taking up the "offer" I made.

I've done the research on my candidate. I pretty well know what I'm getting in Johnson. A guy who vetoes bills that contain pork. A guy who made his money starting his own business instead of buying and selling those of others. A guy who will do his best to fund the important things like education, legitimately streamline government, and who won't waste government time and money on an unwinnable drug war, trying to get gay marriage banned, and the domestic privacy abuses in the Patriot Act.

Do you know what Romney stands for? I don't. He stood for gun control until he decided to run for president. He stood for abortion until he decided to run for president. He allowed gay civil unions until, you guessed it, he decided to run for president. He supports the Patriot Act, indefinite detention of "domestic terrorists" which he says means Al Qaeda, but guess who gets to determine what constitutes a "domestic terrorist"? NOT US. Go ahead, trust him because he says so.

Of course, if he's elected I bet we'll find out for sure what is underneath that shiny exterior. Caveat emptor, but I'm pretty sure even without throwing in the towel I'll still be saying "not my fault." If Obama wins, maybe next time the Republicans can put forth a candidate who will stay the hell out of other people's personal business for a change, and just run the country the way it's supposed to be - innocent until proven guilty, no search and seizure without a warrant, privacy, freedom to pursue, life, liberty, and happiness (even if it may NOT be in line with your personal/spiritual beliefs).

Oh, yeah, he's gotten a lot of money from the same people who benefited from the government bailout (hey, he thought that was a good idea too!), so I'm sure the tax cuts he makes will make things better for you and me. I mean, if I ran a large company and got a tax cut, the first thing I would do is go out and HIRE PEOPLE regardless of what the condition of the economy. Crap, hold on a sec - I mean, if I ran a company and got a tax cut, the first thing I would do is go out and HIRE PEOPLE regardless of what the condition of the economy. There, I purpled it just for you, because I can't make it show up slower on the internet.

& time now, I need to take a break from politics, and probably a chill pill too, been at work too long and I'm grouchy and irritable.

 

[Yup!]

Uh, OK

I guess trying to make a point about people who say "if you don't vote for Romney you're just an Obama supporter, so compromise your principles to get him out" went right over your head. But, since you did say you didn't mind an assault weapons ban on INGO, I'll just take it as not understanding completely the average INGO member. Maybe you think I shouldn't exercise my freedom of speech and NOT challenge others when the "just get Obama out" crowd says that I'm EEEEEVVVVILLLL because I'm voting third party. I'm 100% sure nobody here would even consider taking up the "offer" I made.

I've done the research on my candidate. I pretty well know what I'm getting in Johnson. A guy who vetoes bills that contain pork. A guy who made his money starting his own business instead of buying and selling those of others. A guy who will do his best to fund the important things like education, legitimately streamline government, and who won't waste government time and money on an unwinnable drug war, trying to get gay marriage banned, and the domestic privacy abuses in the Patriot Act.

Do you know what Romney stands for? I don't. He stood for gun control until he decided to run for president. He stood for abortion until he decided to run for president. He allowed gay civil unions until, you guessed it, he decided to run for president. He supports the Patriot Act, indefinite detention of "domestic terrorists" which he says means Al Qaeda, but guess who gets to determine what constitutes a "domestic terrorist"? NOT US.

Of course, if he's elected I bet we'll find out for sure what is underneath that shiny exterior. Caveat emptor, but I'm pretty sure even without throwing in the towel I'll still be saying "not my fault." If Obama wins, maybe next time the Republicans can put forth a candidate who will stay the hell out of other people business for a change, and just run the country the way it's supposed to be - innocent until proven guilty, no search and seizure, free to pursue, life, liberty, and happiness (even if it may NOT be in line with your personal/spiritual beliefs).

Oh, yeah, he's gotten a lot of money from the same people who benefited from the government bailout (hey, he thought that was a good idea too!), so I'm sure the tax cuts he makes will make things better for you and me. I mean, if I ran a large company and got a tax cut, the first thing I would do is go out and HIRE PEOPLE regardless of what the condition of the economy. Crap, hold on a sec - I mean, if I ran a company and got a tax cut, the first thing I would do is go out and HIRE PEOPLE regardless of what the condition of the economy. There, I purpled it just for you, because I can't make it show up slower on the internet.

& time now, I need to take a break from politics, and probably a chill pill too, been at work too long and I'm grouchy and irritable.

Don't go away mad....

Im pretty sure this thread, or the others similar to it, were summed up perfectly a couple of days ago. There is little difference between this thread, and the OC/CC thread. The arguments that both sides make are based mostly on situations and personal opinions. The combination of the two make it highly unlikely that two people will be in 100% agreement, even if they have similar views.

In addition, any one who is actively participating in the thread, in support or defense, likely isn't going be be labeled an "Undecided" Voter. So, it was never my intention to get anyone to change their vote. Nor do I personally care how you cast your vote. I do like to spend time with like minded people, and when its solely my choice, I will often stray away from those who hold opposing view points, unless I specifically see a need to engage. This doesn't make those with opposing view points bad or even different. It's just not something that brings me pleasure, so I avoid it.

This forum however, is different. This a great place to learn, and a great experiment in social interaction, albeit challenging based on the absence of tone and body language.

I rather enjoy the verbal spar, and can honestly say, I've done more research on this Presidential election as a result of this thread, and those similar. My mind hasn't changed, but that's irrelevant. I've learned.

This is precisely why I CC. Because OC is not a good idea!

 

[firehawk1]

Your analogy would be much better if your cracker was laced with cyanide.

No not the the world of reality it isn't, just in the surreal world of Black and White.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

I just want to know if after Obama wins all the "lesser of two evils but I won't waste my vote on a third party" people will consider their vote "wasted" since it wasn't for the winner?

That IS the point of voting for you guys right? To pick the winner, not necessarily the best direction for our country?

 

[hacksawfg]

Don't go away mad....

Im pretty sure this thread, or the others similar to it, were summed up perfectly a couple of days ago. There is little difference between this thread, and the OC/CC thread. The arguments that both sides make are based mostly on situations and personal opinions. The combination of the two make it highly unlikely that two people will be in 100% agreement, even if they have similar views.

In addition, any one who is actively participating in the thread, in support or defense, likely isn't going be be labeled an "Undecided" Voter. So, it was never my intention to get anyone to change their vote. Nor do I personally care how you cast your vote. I do like to spend time with like minded people, and when its solely my choice, I will often stray away from those who hold opposing view points, unless I specifically see a need to engage. This doesn't make those with opposing view points bad or even different. It's just not something that brings me pleasure, so I avoid it.

This forum however, is different. This a great place to learn, and a great experiment in social interaction, albeit challenging based on the absence of tone and body language.

I rather enjoy the verbal spar, and can honestly say, I've done more research on this Presidential election as a result of this thread, and those similar. My mind hasn't changed, but that's irrelevant. I've learned.

This is precisely why I CC. Because OC is not a good idea!

Impossible to go away mad, bacon and beer are calling me. They're saying "kill your diet. Just kill it. You can start again tomorrow." I'm tired enough to listen.

This is precisely why I never tell anyone how I carry. Because it's my personal choice and I'm tired of drive-by OC/CC debate thread-jackings

FIFY

 

[firehawk1]

I just want to know if after Obama wins all the "lesser of two evils but I won't waste my vote on a third party" people will consider their vote "wasted" since it wasn't for the winner?

That IS the point of voting for you guys right? To pick the winner, not necessarily the best direction for our country?

IMO a vote for Johnson isn't the best direction for the country. Call me kooky call me crazy BUT most likely has to do with the fact HE WON'T WIN.... or something like that.