Why Obama is going to get 4 more years.

[rambone]

 

[Colinb913]

This kind of sucks, this is my first year voting. Instead of voting for someone I want, I will just be voting against someone I don't want.

 

[HICKMAN]

Whatever a conservative SCOTUS has done is feeble and temporary yet a liberal SCOTUS would be ironclad and forever. Really? That's just poor logic.

Whoever attempts to kill the Constitution knows they are pushing the reset button.

I'm not scared.

Assuming Romney wins, there will be two liberal elitists facing off against each other. Both globalists, both backed by Goldman Sachs, both support bailouts to their Establishment cronies. I don't understand why anyone thinks Romney's nominees are going to be remotely in line with the constitution.

The Powers That Be are going to remain the same no matter which NWO puppet takes the stage.

Fair enough, took me long enough to support Ron Paul. I guess whatever is going to happen is going to happen.

Just want to get my AR finished first

 

[J_Wales]

This kind of sucks, this is my first year voting. Instead of voting for someone I want, I will just be voting against someone I don't want.

You should be commended for your discernment.

I know many that have voted for decades and have yet to recognize the difference.

Best regards.

 

[Lucas156]

It doesn't matter who gets voted in IMO; within the next four years our economy will be in in the ****ter so it won't really matter.

 

[Smokepole]

That was my initial thought on this. I still havent made up my mind, but I will most likely be voting for Paul. Ive wanted Paul in since I first heard of him. Its just the thought of seeing our current POTUS get reelected has me all flustered. I cant stand the very thought of it. I seems like a dilemma of settling for instant mediocracy or suffering another 4 years in hopes for an overall greater good. And looking at it that way, I will suffer 4 more years under the reign of BHO if it means a better life for my future children and grand children.

The problem is it will only get worse for them (us all) if the current NWO stooge is elected. The gamble is if M. R. will just stagnate the current slide into the abyss until we can possibly get a REAL conservative candidate in office. We didn't get here quickly or efficiently and the fix won't be either. We have to do what we can where we can to find and elect that people that can and will fix it. It will take time, but every step in the right direction is positive. No war (and this IS a war) goes according to plan every step of the way. The Progressives new this and proceeded steadily the whole way. We have to understand this as well and work with it. The alternative is continuing the fall.

The Tea Party is still working and can help bring candidates into Congress that can help to hold a Repub. Pres'. feet to the fire. So we also need to focus heavily on the Congress if we want to keep our Republic in tact.

 

[Stschil]

I know the focus is on POTUS and I'm not trying to minimize it although I would encourage everyone to really spend some time researching and talking with your local representatives as well.

Check out the other thread where Virginia is saying eat FED on NDAA indefinitely holding US citizens.

It's clear we won't get change that's top down. It's gonna need to be bottoms up.

The problem is it will only get worse for them (us all) if the current NWO stooge is elected. The gamble is if M. R. will just stagnate the current slide into the abyss until we can possibly get a REAL conservative candidate in office. We didn't get here quickly or efficiently and the fix won't be either. We have to do what we can where we can to find and elect that people that can and will fix it. It will take time, but every step in the right direction is positive. No war (and this IS a war) goes according to plan every step of the way. The Progressives new this and proceeded steadily the whole way. We have to understand this as well and work with it. The alternative is continuing the fall.

The Tea Party is still working and can help bring candidates into Congress that can help to hold a Repub. Pres'. feet to the fire. So we also need to focus heavily on the Congress if we want to keep our Republic in tact.

Yes and yes.
Instead of trying so hard to tell those with the intestinal fortitude to speak up and decry the machinations of the two failing parties to go along, Focus energies on gaining seats in Congress. Holding the House and regaining control of the Senate by installing Conservative Senators (by by Dicky Lugar) and Representatives. Make whoever gains the White House a Lame Duck who has no control, but the Will of the People.

Let your votes against Party Elitists bring the message that They are no longer to be trusted.


A majority on both houses will ensure that crap lib SCOTUS appointees won't be confirmed.

Change will not come quietly. Change will not come by itself.

Like ATM said upthread: "I'm not scared"

 

[tv1217]

Can I write in Mr. Potato Head?

 

[sun]

In all likelihood, this next election is going to be determined by the women's vote and the trends are showing that the great majority of women will not be voting for Romney.
Each individual voter choses their owned perceived lesser evil and that's all there is too it.
So let's not disrespect who our mom's and wives might be voting for by referring to them as the sheeple.
People are always free to call other folks sheeple if they want to but a mother can always call her own son a loser too.

This message is not a paid political announcement and is for entertainment purposes only. Please enjoy the regular scheduled programming.

 

[spec4]

It's not so much that women (and men) vote for Obama, its the thought process (flawed IMO) that they use to decide their vote.

 

[Eric05]

I wonder what it would take to get Mitch in the White House.

 

[Pocketman]

Let's face it, good candidates are reluctant to run against an incumbent president. 2016 will likely produce better people interested in the job. (It won't be Rick Santorum, btw.)

A lot can happen in the months leading up to the election. Who knows, some of you may learn to actually like Romney after he goes through his Etch-a-Sketch transformation. Personally I'm holding out until he selects Sarah Palin as his running mate.

 

[tr1gg3r]

That was my initial thought on this. I still havent made up my mind, but I will most likely be voting for Paul.

Perhaps you would be interested in learning about a fella named Gary Johnson?

 

[J_Wales]

That would be a kick in the crotch for Unions

Indeed it would be much different than the bastard that bypassed U.S. law, kicked secured creditors to the curb, and handed a company over to the unions.

 

[jsgolfman]

Four years ago, the GOP nominated a moderate to run against Obama. This nomination split the party vote. Half of us voted for McCain (personally, I did. I didn't like him but viewed him as the lesser of two evils), and the other half voted for a third candidate, whether that was Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Santa Claus or Mr. Potato Head. When the numbers came in, it turned out that if all the republicans who had voted for the third candidate had instead voted McCain, Obama wouldn't be in office right now.
Please provide data for this assumption (hint, you won't find it as it doesn't exist).

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

Please provide data for this assumption (hint, you won't find it as it doesn't exist).

Just like 2008, this year's moderate candidate will lose by more than the margin of people who flee to the 3rd parties or do write-ins.

It's a shame that the party doesn't realize how important it is to put forward a candidate who can also capture the independent voters. Romney, a watered down version of Obama, isn't exactly an independent voter's dream candidate and isn't going to much to capture the dissatisfied dem's who are on the fence about voting outside their party.

 

[.45 Dave]

So, in other words, kinda like kissing your sister...

Which is still better than kissing your brother! And voting for Obama is a little like getting....well, something else from your brother--and without your consent!

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

Which is still better than kissing your brother! And voting for Obama is a little like getting....well, something else from your brother--and without your consent!

As opposed to consenting to your sister Willard strapping one on and giving you the same treatment as your brother was going to give you without your consent?

Good deal I guess.

 

[ATM]

...It's a shame that the party doesn't realize how important it is to put forward a candidate who can also capture the independent voters.

It's only a shame if you believe that party must survive as a dominant party.

If you're watching them dig their own grave and waiting for a better party to rise to dominance and take their place, it's almost laughable.

 

[jsgolfman]

Just like 2008, this year's moderate candidate will lose by more than the margin of people who flee to the 3rd parties or do write-ins.

It's a shame that the party doesn't realize how important it is to put forward a candidate who can also capture the independent voters. Romney, a watered down version of Obama, isn't exactly an independent voter's dream candidate and isn't going to much to capture the dissatisfied dem's who are on the fence about voting outside their party.

I actually did the math 4 years ago because I got tired of listening to comments like the OP about how "third party" voters cost the R's the election. I presented the numbers showing that O would have won even if ALL the other voters rallied together for one candidate. All I heard after that was crickets.