To vote, or not vote

Note to Yurt - even though your reference was to Bush Sr., Onceler is talking about Bush Jr. This may come as a shock to you, because no one is that fixated in real life.
 
here is the issue:

i want a candidate who is conservative fiscally and liberal socially. for example i want a candidate who espouses these traits:

1. gay marriage - for it or get the government out of marriage.

2. marijuana - just like alcohol.

3. spending - reduce spending. cut back our military bases around the world and cut the waste. same said for medicare etc....but no pub or dem will ever agree to both.

that is just for starters....do you have a candidate who espouses all three?

except for treating marijuana like alcohol, it sounds like johnson.
 
To vote for a candidate that has no chance is actually voting for a candidate that does. Primary voting is specifically for casting your vote of preference, the general candidate is determined by who wins that popular vote. Ron Paul is running on the GOP ticket. He has a responsibility, to coalesce behind the candidate that gets the nod if he does not. He then has a responsibility to encourage his supporters to do the same- if he does not do that, then he is the fraud. He should not have run on the GOP ticket if that is his end game.

this is political establishment thinking that has saddled us with the lesser of two evils for decades and look where we're at now.
 
here is the issue:

i want a candidate who is conservative fiscally and liberal socially. for example i want a candidate who espouses these traits:

1. gay marriage - for it or get the government out of marriage.



2. marijuana - just like alcohol.

3. spending - reduce spending. cut back our military bases around the world and cut the waste. same said for medicare etc....but no pub or dem will ever agree to both.

that is just for starters....do you have a candidate who espouses all three?

Then vote for a democrat you freaking moron.
 
this is political establishment thinking that has saddled us with the lesser of two evils for decades and look where we're at now.

It is political reality. You can moan and groan 'til the cows come home. Or you can vote for the candidate least likely to fuck things up more, but is the only one with a chance to win. You then continue to work locally as well as nationally organizing behind groups and individuals who can get into other elections to fight another day. Gingrich has his faults, but he is absolutely correct about one thing- The best place to begin real change is locally. Four more years of Obama and this country will not resemble anything we were founded on.

I do not see it as a lesser of two evils to not get the man/woman I think the most qualified- but a stop gap to certain economic destruction that we now have proof Obama will deliver.
 
It is political reality. You can moan and groan 'til the cows come home. Or you can vote for the candidate least likely to fuck things up more, but is the only one with a chance to win. You then continue to work locally as well as nationally organizing behind groups and individuals who can get into other elections to fight another day. Gingrich has his faults, but he is absolutely correct about one thing- The best place to begin real change is locally. Four more years of Obama and this country will not resemble anything we were founded on.

I do not see it as a lesser of two evils to not get the man/woman I think the most qualified- but a stop gap to certain economic destruction that we now have proof Obama will deliver.

I'd rather vote for what was right and watch the world burn, than settle for the lesser of two evils in the grip of the establishment.
 
I'd rather vote for what was right and watch the world burn, than settle for the lesser of two evils in the grip of the establishment.

I think you are naive in what you would be willing to have happen. I also believe you are being knee-jerk in understanding that this system of ours, while imperfect, has always managed to right itself- though it might take a generation or two as well as a number of election cycles. While your passionate ideals are commendable, and I really believe that they are, I also believe they blind you to a need for patience.
 
I think you are naive in what you would be willing to have happen. I also believe you are being knee-jerk in understanding that this system of ours, while imperfect, has always managed to right itself- though it might take a generation or two as well as a number of election cycles. While your passionate ideals are commendable, and I really believe that they are, I also believe they blind you to a need for patience.

I do understand your viewpoint. Mine comes from being naively asleep as a teenager/young adult. up until I turned 30, I was much like any other liberal, trusting in the government and police. Once I hit my 30s, moved to Texas, fell in with a group of people who were more than just pro gun/pro freedom, I got a look at what our lesser of two evils system has developed. I'm 45 now and my patience is gone. I would prefer to have freedom while I'm still alive than to suffer it out just so my great grandkids might have it.
 
I think you are naive in what you would be willing to have happen. I also believe you are being knee-jerk in understanding that this system of ours, while imperfect, has always managed to right itself- though it might take a generation or two as well as a number of election cycles. While your passionate ideals are commendable, and I really believe that they are, I also believe they blind you to a need for patience.

This is what happens when a child (in years) trys to make up his mind.
He thinks he has all the answers and he doesn't even know what all the questions are. :)
 
Back
Top