Your vote must be cast wisely, will it be right?

[ATM]

Your vote must be cast wisely, will it be right?

Wisely? Of course! I do everything wisely. It's kinda my thing.

Though I don't really subscribe to the limited and unrealistically simplified dichotomy of "left/right", I'm sure most of the populace would consider themselves to be to the left of me.

I, quite honestly, consider most of them to be beneath me.*




* Nolan Chart

 

[Cheapdiesel]

So I believe it is no longer wise to vote for chuckle heads! I.E. Obama, Romney and the last several republican nominees for president. I will never again vote for the lesser of two evils! I will vote for a third party for president. It is simply untrue that if you don't vote for the Republican candidate you are voting for Obama. We need radical change and we will not get it from these Chuckle heads that we have been offered. I list the 2008 results below you do the math I have.

The Federal Election Commission has released its “2008 presidential popular vote summary for all candidates listed on at least one state ballot.” The results:

Barack Obama (Democrat) 69,498,516 [52.93%]
John McCain (Republican) 59,948,323 [45.65%]
Ralph Nader (Independent, Peace and Freedom) 739,034 [0.56%]
Bob Barr (Libertarian) 523,715 [0.40%]
Chuck Baldwin (Constitution/Reform/U.S. Taxpayers) 199,750 [0.15%]
Cynthia McKinney (Green, Independent, Mountain) 161,797 [0.12%]
Write-In (Miscellaneous) 112,597 [0.09%]
Alan Keyes (America’s Independent) 47,746 [0.04%]
Ron Paul (Constitution, Louisiana Taxpayers) 42,426 [0.03%]
Gloria La Riva (Socialism and Liberation) 6,818 [0.01%]

 

[hooky]

You ever stop and think that the slide to the left is because of the political brainwashing over the years?

The brakes HAVE to be applied slowly in order to reach across and pull people back to the right, if not they react adversely and pull away and you do nothing but burn up the brakes up and have nothing left when needed.

The current mindset will not be turned around in short order, this is a grind it out, win one voter back at a time process. You'll have to reboot each persons way of thinking, not an easy task when it comes to most liberals.

You mean like Johnson did in the democratically controlled state of New Mexico when he took a billion dollar deficit and turned it into a surplus, while vetoing crap legislative bills 750+ times in 8 years as he cut taxes 14 times without a single tax increase making it past him resulting in the growth of governement being halved after successfully building a 1,000+ employee construction business over the previous 20 years.

That kind of slow braking?

The republican party doesn't want that kind of braking. It will cut into their ability to consolidate power by giving out freebies at a slower rate than the democratic party does.

 

[steveh_131]

You mean like Johnson did in the democratically controlled state of New Mexico when he took a billion dollar deficit and turned it into a surplus, while vetoing crap legislative bills 750+ times in 8 years as he cut taxes 14 times without a single tax increase making it past him resulting in the growth of governement being halved after successfully building a 1,000+ employee construction business over the previous 20 years.

That kind of slow braking?

The republican party doesn't want that kind of braking. It will cut into their ability to consolidate power by giving out freebies at a slower rate than the democratic party does.

 

[churchmouse]

You mean like Johnson did in the democratically controlled state of New Mexico when he took a billion dollar deficit and turned it into a surplus, while vetoing crap legislative bills 750+ times in 8 years as he cut taxes 14 times without a single tax increase making it past him resulting in the growth of governement being halved after successfully building a 1,000+ employee construction business over the previous 20 years.

That kind of slow braking?

The republican party doesn't want that kind of braking. It will cut into their ability to consolidate power by giving out freebies at a slower rate than the democratic party does.

Perfect. But can he be the next president.
Just what we need but again....can he make the cut in the general election.

 

[hooky]

Economists joke "Sure that would work, but how does it look on paper?". The political equivalent is "Sure, that's what we need, but how would we look if we actually supported him and voted for him?"

 

[mrjarrell]

Perfect. But can he be the next president.
Just what we need but again....can he make the cut in the general election.

Well, if you vote for him and get your friends and neighbours to do it, too then he'll certainly stand a much better chance than if you proceed with the "strategy" of not this time, it's too important. Don't waste your vote on a real loser. Vote your principles and for the candidate who would be the best. The one with a proven record.

 

[JettaKnight]

But we as gun owners must think of this, and this one thing only.

No.


Believe it or not, some us us aren't one issue voters.

Nor am I going to be scared by boogeyman stories about how Obama falls asleep at night dreaming about taking my guns.



PS - I will not be voting for Obama.

 

[sepe]

Perfect. But can he be the next president.
Just what we need but again....can he make the cut in the general election.

No, no he can't. He can't because far too many people will vote for a letter by a name or for anyone but the current person holding the office. It doesn't matter much if they think the person they're voting for is only slightly less garbage than the guy they want gone. It doesn't matter if they agree with the majority of what a 3rd party candidate says, they won't vote for them if their favorite letter isn't next to the name. Nothing will ever change while people are committed to propping up the 2 party system.

I'm guessing some of the 3rd party guys would do a much better job if they when on fist pounding rants that had little to do with the real problems in this country. I think they need to up the volume and have a much more generic message.

 

[hooky]

I'm guessing some of the 3rd party guys would do a much better job if they when on fist pounding rants that had little to do with the real problems in this country. I think they need to up the volume and have a much more generic message.

How's this?

 

[mrjarrell]

No.


Believe it or not, some us us aren't one issue voters.

Nor am I going to be scared by boogeyman stories about how Obama falls asleep at night dreaming about taking my guns.



PS - I will not be voting for Obama.

^^This. There's more than one issue out there and my guns aren't even in the top 3 for me.

 

[sepe]

How's this?

Works for me. Should work for the anybody but Obama group too.

 

[churchmouse]

Works for me. Should work for the anybody but Obama group too.

OK, this makes sense.

 

[churchmouse]

No, no he can't. He can't because far too many people will vote for a letter by a name or for anyone but the current person holding the office. It doesn't matter much if they think the person they're voting for is only slightly less garbage than the guy they want gone. It doesn't matter if they agree with the majority of what a 3rd party candidate says, they won't vote for them if their favorite letter isn't next to the name. Nothing will ever change while people are committed to propping up the 2 party system.

I'm guessing some of the 3rd party guys would do a much better job if they when on fist pounding rants that had little to do with the real problems in this country. I think they need to up the volume and have a much more generic message.

Agreed. This does have to start on a local level before it will get any steam behind it.

 

[rgrimm01]

Agreed. This does have to start on a local level before it will get any steam behind it.

No doubt... In what universe does one assemble the rafters, decking and roofing without having the foundation and walls in place?

If libertarians cannot win local elections and then hold on to the office(in any real numbers), how does anyone think that they could possibly win the office of the presidency?

The libertarians have to have some numbers in congress and senate before they can change the rules that stack the deck in favor of the two parties. Until such time, aint happening...

 

[indiucky]

And in other news: the ones who say "Vote for Johnson or vote for tyranny" exhibit another round of hypocrisy.

But look how cool he is...I mean look at him...This guy is cool....He crowd surfed....


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RROR4AqyCyg[/ame]

I bet if we had youtube back in the Founders day we would have seen George Washington crowd surfing. A sure sign of a true leader and Constitutional scholar.

 

[NomadS]

Economists joke "Sure that would work, but how does it look on paper?". The political equivalent is "Sure, that's what we need, but how would we look if we actually supported him and voted for him?"

do you think 100% of the people that vote republican would support a 100% Libertarian (big L) candidate if the choice was only between BHO and him? I would guess the number is closer to 70%..

Even if every one of those 70% voted for Johnson, Obama would still be the next president.

Work on getting the next nominee more libertarian (small L) and all the republicans will vote for him. But you can only do that if you are in the republican party. You are the solution, but only if you act from within.

 

[jamil]

do you think 100% of the people that vote republican would support a 100% Libertarian (big L) candidate if the choice was only between BHO and him? I would guess the number is closer to 70%..

Even if every one of those 70% voted for Johnson, Obama would still be the next president.

Work on getting the next nominee more libertarian (small L) and all the republicans will vote for him. But you can only do that if you are in the republican party. You are the solution, but only if you act from within.

If the Republican Party were more libertarian, I might consider joining it. But I don't want Republicans to go full-on Ron Paul all over it.

 

[NomadS]

If the Republican Party were more libertarian, I might consider joining it. But I don't want Republicans to go full-on Ron Paul all over it.

the only way it will become more libertarian is if there are more libertarian people in it. The party is a reflection the people in it.. don't like the party get more involved, not less