Happy Atheist Forum

Me, I'm voting for good ol' Ron Paul. He's gonna' bring us change from the change, and Lor' knows we need some o' that. If you don't know much about Ron Paul, I suggest this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I4EsfnUGrI

Quote from: Ransom on November 24, 2011, 12:59:42 AM
Me, I'm voting for good ol' Ron Paul. He's gonna' bring us change from the change, and Lor' knows we need some o' that. If you don't know much about Ron Paul, I suggest this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I4EsfnUGrI

Unless he's changed his mind on letting the uninsured just die, that'd be a no for Paul.

Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on November 24, 2011, 01:38:00 AM

Quote from: Ransom on November 24, 2011, 12:59:42 AM
Me, I'm voting for good ol' Ron Paul. He's gonna' bring us change from the change, and Lor' knows we need some o' that. If you don't know much about Ron Paul, I suggest this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I4EsfnUGrI

Unless he's changed his mind on letting the uninsured just die, that'd be a no for Paul.

Not quite sure what yer talkin' about... explain?

You have like elections again over on that side of the Ocean..? Doesn't seem that long since Bushy finally left the office. (Although a couple of years earlier and a bootprint on his ass for a few weeks would have been better for everyone, methink)

Quote from: Asmodean on November 24, 2011, 04:33:39 PM
You have like elections again over on that side of the Ocean..? Doesn't seem that long since Bushy finally left the office. (Although a couple of years earlier and a bootprint on his ass for a few weeks would have been better for everyone, methink)

The elections are in Nov '12, the campaigning started 2 years ago.  (I exaggerate -- slightly) 

Quote from: RansomNot quite sure what yer talkin' about... explain?

I'm referring to that Repub debate where Wolf Blitzer asked Paul about the fate of a hypothetical young man who didn't buy health insurance, and lost his gamble that he wouldn't become seriously ill.  Paul's answer was that the guy made his choice -- in blunter language, let him die.  To be fair to Paul, the rest of the Repub candidates seemed to agree with that and the Tea Party audience actually cheered.  Of course, they also cheered when Perry's execution record was announced.

Ron Paul has no chance.  Period.

Quote from: Thumpalumpacus on November 25, 2011, 10:24:10 PM
Ron Paul has no chance.  Period.

I do love it when people use the word 'Period' to finish a point as though it somehow added authority to their prior statement. I always get a picture of somebody holding their hand up and saying 'Talk to the hand!'  ;D

Having said that I sincerely hope that Obama makes it back in as all the Republican alternatives are very little short of terrifying!

I usually use the word "period" to signify that a, the point is fully made and/or b, I'm not open to debate it.

Quote from: Tank on November 26, 2011, 09:07:20 AM

Quote from: Thumpalumpacus on November 25, 2011, 10:24:10 PM
Ron Paul has no chance.  Period.

I do love it when people use the word 'Period' to finish a point as though it somehow added authority to their prior statement. I always get a picture of somebody holding their hand up and saying 'Talk to the hand!'  ;D

Ye I feel the wrong in the period thing, discussion over, end of discussion, but this isn't people it's Thumpalumpacus.
He abandoned Bert and he abandoned us, he's been on a journey denying comfort, or maybe he had login difficulties.

LLAP Thumpa

http://mcmillan2012.com

With the cain girl train over im hoping this guy gains some sort of traction.

Pretty sure my household is voting Obama.

Quote from: not your typical... on December 06, 2011, 04:45:22 AMPretty sure my household is voting Obama.

With the fail train that is fighting over who gets to go up against Obama? I don't blame ya. Unless a new candidate appears, Obama is looking like the best option again.

Even if I hated Obama he'd still be a better choice than all the current Republican candidates combined.  Even Ron Paul is a horrible option; sure he has some liberal views but ultimately he's just a hypocritical nutjob who makes the libertarian position look even worse than it is.

He's for personal freedom and small gov but anti church state separation (hypocritical):  http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Religion

He seems to be homophobic:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Sexual_orientation_legislation  In a 2007 interview with John Stossel, Paul stated that he supported the right of gay couples to marry, so long as they didn't "impose" their relationship on anyone else, on the grounds of supporting voluntary associations.

He wants to allow states to decide what women can do with their own bodies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Abortion-related_legislation

I can't find evidence of it off hand but I know in one of the debates he strongly implied if not directly said that illegal aliens who are in the US and in need of medical care should be denied help and just shipped back over the border.  But I'm pretty sure almost all of the other republican candidates would be on board with that anyway.

Not to mention that the libertarian view of privatizing education would create generations of ignorant people who grew up in areas that were too poor to fund their own schools...it's already bad enough in really poor areas with government funding.  I think people with libertarian views on education tend to be at least somewhat well off and out of touch with the grossly underprivaledged population.

Quote from: Whitney on December 06, 2011, 03:03:49 PMNot to mention that the libertarian view of privatizing education would create generations of ignorant people who grew up in areas that were too poor to fund their own schools...it's already bad enough in really poor areas with government funding.  I think people with libertarian views on education tend to be at least somewhat well off and out of touch with the grossly underprivaledged population.

I'm tired of talking things over with libertarians. It usually starts out with the libertarian being condescending and analogizing everything they don't agree with as rape and/or slavery. Then when you start discussing their views, they end up agreeing that the things they seemed very much against, they actually think are needed, but never recant calling me a blind sheep/idiot who has no understanding of how things really work. One guy is receiving gov. educational grants, at the same time as arguing against them...

I'm a libertarian by definition because I advocate and fight for individual freedoms, but because of all the arrogant, condescending people who call themselves libertarians (they really just look like people that don't want to support the society that supports the things they like and that helped them get to where they are), I don't pin that label onto myself.

Quote from: Davin on December 06, 2011, 04:21:43 PMI'm a libertarian by definition because I advocate and fight for individual freedoms, but because of all the arrogant, condescending people who call themselves libertarians (they really just look like people that don't want to support the society that supports the things they like and that helped them get to where they are), I don't pin that label onto myself.

This reminded me of an amusing comic about the varieties of libertarians. I have libertarian/anarchist tendencies myself, but do not consider humanity ready to achieve the sort of society that is envisioned by people such as Bakunin. I agree that the smug and seemingly rather thoughtless glorification of greed and selfishness espoused by many who call themselves libertarians has besmirched the name.

Quote from: Davin on December 06, 2011, 04:21:43 PM
I'm a libertarian by definition because I advocate and fight for individual freedoms,

That is the heart and soul of libertarianism, but, as you say, it now carries some unfortunate baggage.

Quote from: Recusant on December 06, 2011, 05:10:42 PM

Quote from: Davin on December 06, 2011, 04:21:43 PMI'm a libertarian by definition because I advocate and fight for individual freedoms, but because of all the arrogant, condescending people who call themselves libertarians (they really just look like people that don't want to support the society that supports the things they like and that helped them get to where they are), I don't pin that label onto myself.

This reminded me of an amusing comic about the varieties of libertarians. I have libertarian/anarchist tendencies myself, but do not consider humanity ready to achieve the sort of society that is envisioned by people such as Bakunin. I agree that the smug and seemingly rather thoughtless glorification of greed and selfishness espoused by many who call themselves libertarians has besmirched the name.

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/6452/typesoflibertarian1g.png (http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/6452/typesoflibertarian1g.png)

Yeah, that one is hilarious, they need to add in the hipster version that I seem to be portraying, "I'm a libertarian, but not like those other 'libertarians'."

Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on December 06, 2011, 05:48:27 PM

Quote from: Davin on December 06, 2011, 04:21:43 PM
I'm a libertarian by definition because I advocate and fight for individual freedoms,

That is the heart and soul of libertarianism, but, as you say, it now carries some unfortunate baggage.

Yeah, I might fight to take the label back, but I don't like political labels much (mostly against political parties), so I just leave it.

To avoid taking the Rick Perry thread (http://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=8783.0) too far off topic, I've chosen to respond to Brent's latest post there in this thread:

Quote from: Brent on December 08, 2011, 07:15:37 PMThe biggest reason I like Ron Paul is because he wants our troops home and he will work to end the Federal Reserve.  I know he isn't perfect, but I think he would do better with the economy than any of the other candidates.

Why do you think that the Federal Reserve should be abolished, and what would you consider to be a reasonable replacement for it?

I'm voting against whoever takes the Republican nomination. What a terrifying gallery of the insane, the narcissistic and the corrupt. I guess that means I'm voting for President Obama again.

I look at the politicians on this side of the pond and despair. Then I watch the youtube interviews posted here and thank God that I live here!

Quote from: Will on December 08, 2011, 09:19:47 PM
I'm voting against whoever takes the Republican nomination. What a terrifying gallery of the insane, the narcissistic and the corrupt. I guess that means I'm voting for President Obama again.

Yay. Godd Will. Smart Will. ;)

To the great excitement of political comedians; you can watch the republican candiates face off in a debate headed by the one and only Trump on Dec 27

Correction...lol, so far only two have agreed to go (Gingrich and Santorum) and Perry has officially decline....it's a conspiracy against the great Trump I tell you!  :D

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/08/rnc-chair-takes-issue-with-trump-debate/

Oh, and don't worry, Trump has indicated that he will throw his hat back in the ring as an independent if the republicans don't choose the right candidate.....so there is still hope that you can vote for your main man.  ;)

Where political candidates are concerned, particularly presidential, greatness is behind us.  There isn't likely to be another Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Truman, etc... anytime in the foreseeable future.  They're all much too corrupt, greedy and self-absorbed for that today.   :'(

Obama was the best shot we had in a long time but his attempts to try and begin to reverse the damage of W and his cronies has mostly failed due in large part to Republican partisanship watering down his efforts.  They were gonna unite to bring him down from the start no matter what it took.  That and he cared too much about making everyone happy.  That was never gonna happen and he should've known it.  The changes America voted for were to be decisive and sweeping.  That hasn't even come close to happening.  I think the Obama administration will go down in history as a missed opportunity.

Isn't it about time for another revolution?

I would vote for a Reagan, but those republicans are far, far away. Unfortunately, the teabaggers don't have anyone with even an ounce of rationality to put forward, so I decided very quickly to vote for good old Obammy.

I would probably vote for Buddy Roehmer if he got nominated...but I do not see that happening.

Republican.  Not Ron Paul though, but he won't get the nomination anyway.....

I won't be voting for anyone.  I will not vote.  I will not let the people that own this country believe we fall for the false Democrat vs Republican choice they shove in or faces at election time. 

Why just Democrats and Republicans - doesn't anyone even ask?  Why aren't there 3, 4, 5 Major parties?  It's because the system is corrupt, that's why.

Anyways, if you want to see what lows the to which American System of elections has descended, I invite you to read an article written by Matt Taibbi and entitled, "Mad Dog Palin" :  http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/mad-dog-palin-20100405

The truly disgusting thing about Sarah Palin isn't that she's totally unqualified, or a religious zealot, or married to a secessionist, or unable to educate her own daughter about sex, or a fake conservative who raised taxes and horked up earmark millions every chance she got. No, the most disgusting thing about her is what she says about us: that you can ram us in the ass for eight solid years, and we'll not only thank you for your trouble, we'll sign you up for eight more years, if only you promise to stroke us in the right spot for a few hours around election time.

Quote from: Happy_Is_Good on December 23, 2011, 07:22:19 PM
[...]the most disgusting thing about her is what she says about us: that you can ram us in the ass for eight solid years, and we'll not only thank you for your trouble, we'll sign you up for eight more years, if only you promise to stroke us in the right spot for a few hours around election time.

Actually sounds quite spot on, IMO.

Quote from: Happy_Is_Good on December 23, 2011, 07:22:19 PM
I won't be voting for anyone.  I will not vote.  I will not let the people that own this country believe we fall for the false Democrat vs Republican choice they shove in or faces at election time. 

Why just Democrats and Republicans - doesn't anyone even ask?  Why aren't there 3, 4, 5 Major parties?  It's because the system is corrupt, that's why.

I continue to believe that there is a great opportunity for a centrist party that is just in favor of competence and pragmatism and what works.  If it could get 1/3 of the vote for President and 1/3 of the seats in Congress it could grab 1/6 from either left or right on any particular issue and garner a majority.  A centrist, independent President would be good - he/she wouldn't be a whore for either side.  Right now, I'm on the verge of hating my own government. It is dysfunctional, and can't get anything done until the 11th hour.  As Hamish said in Brave Heart, "they can't agree on the color of shit." 

I'm not saying who I'm voting for because it is a secret vote. I can tell you who I'm not voting for to a degree. As the time to vote nears and the candidates are narrowed down, I'll eventually make up my mind. Then, the choices will be right, left, possibly independent and to not vote at all. So far, three of those choices appeal to me.

Here's an interesting article about an American political organization searching for a third way to break the ideological stalemate that currently exists in Washington.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/29/politics/americans-elect/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

This is kind of scary, people willing to undermine the foundations of society for their political advantage.

QuoteNewt Gingrich on Sunday hammered at the nation's judiciary system (http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/gingrich-capitol-police-could-arrest-radical-judges.php), saying that if a court's decision was out of step with American popular opinion, it should be ignored.

There's "no reason the American people need to tolerate a judge that out of touch with American culture," Gingrich said on CBS' Face the Nation, referring to a case where a judge ruled that explicit references to religion were barred from a high school graduation ceremony. And Gingrich recently has said judges should have to explain some of their decisions before Congress.

Host Bob Schieffer asked Gingrich how he planned to enforce that. Would you call in the Capitol Police to apprehend a federal judge, he asked.

"If you had to," Gingrich said. "Or you'd instruct the Justice Department to send the U.S. Marshall in."

Quote from: The Magic Pudding on January 01, 2012, 06:57:20 AMThis is kind of scary, people willing to undermine the foundations of society for their political advantage.

Gingrich is, and has been for decades, a soulless hack, concerned with personal advancement. But that is standard for politicians-- Gingrich just happens to be a particularly odious specimen. I really doubt that he'll succeed in getting the Republican nomination, but I think that the Democrats would be happy if he did.

I'm kind of surprised at all the excitement around Ron Paul. I think he is insane.

Obama will probably be receiving my reluctant vote. Huntsman is the only grown up in the Republican party but for that very reason it looks like he won't be getting the nomination.

Quote from: Sophus on January 02, 2012, 12:02:23 AM
I'm kind of surprised at all the excitement Ron Paul has been getting. I think he is insane.

Obama will probably be receiving my reluctant vote. Huntsman is the only grown up in the Republican party but for that very reason it looks like he won't be getting the nomination.

I've missed you, man. It's great to see you around here again!

Happy new year! (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg87.imageshack.us%2Fimg87%2F1205%2Fwinedheers.gif&hash=049ea987d0c68a814892072ff9ce05e763794091)  (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frationalia.com%2Fforum%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Fgrin.gif&hash=8e1dbf9c0bca696aee6a6bd7852aaf9be7f1d0af)

Quote from: Recusant on January 02, 2012, 12:09:43 AM

Quote from: Sophus on January 02, 2012, 12:02:23 AM
I'm kind of surprised at all the excitement Ron Paul has been getting. I think he is insane.

Obama will probably be receiving my reluctant vote. Huntsman is the only grown up in the Republican party but for that very reason it looks like he won't be getting the nomination.

Yay! Sophus is back!

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frationalia.com%2Fz%2Ffireworks-074.gif&hash=12ca17c2461e3ec40a37712e18e4a2b16a063b3e)

I've missed you, man. It's great to see you around here again!

Happy new year! (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg87.imageshack.us%2Fimg87%2F1205%2Fwinedheers.gif&hash=049ea987d0c68a814892072ff9ce05e763794091)  (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frationalia.com%2Fforum%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Fgrin.gif&hash=8e1dbf9c0bca696aee6a6bd7852aaf9be7f1d0af)

Cheers. You too, Recusant. I forgot how much I liked this little forum.

Quote from: Tank on November 26, 2011, 09:07:20 AM

Quote from: Thumpalumpacus on November 25, 2011, 10:24:10 PM
Ron Paul has no chance.  Period.

I do love it when people use the word 'Period' to finish a point as though it somehow added authority to their prior statement. I always get a picture of somebody holding their hand up and saying 'Talk to the hand!'  ;D

Having said that I sincerely hope that Obama makes it back in as all the Republican alternatives are very little short of terrifying!

In my opinion, Bush tainted the Republican name so much that Obama could be everything the Tea Party is trying to make him out to be and still win in '12.

Of course, that might be the reason why Perry is doing horrible. It's Bush's clone!

Oh, and I'm voting for Obama if and only if he drops his current VP and puts in someone with a brain.

I'll vote for Obama again, although in my red state it won't really matter. I cannot believe we still use the Electoral College.

Voting Obama again.  I agree that he made a big mistake in trying to please a party that simply refused to be pleased under any circumstance, but he's still the lesser of two evils.

Quote from: Ali on January 12, 2012, 05:27:55 PM
Voting Obama again.  I agree that he made a big mistake in trying to please a party that simply refused to be pleased under any circumstance, but he's still the lesser of two evils.

Ditto.  Even Mitt Romney scare me a little, and most of the rest are the stuff of nightmares.

Can't know who I'm voting for just yet. The talking heads on TV haven't made up my mind for me.
8)

To be honest, I don't know yet. Our primary is on the horizon, and after doing a bit of research I'll have a better idea. I think pretty much all of the Republican candidates are boobs, with the possible exception of Hunstman. Paul isn't really electable.

Obama? Ehhh...maybe, maybe not. I like him, but he hasn't exactly thrilled me with his first term.

It'll be Obama for me. Frankly, he's too centrist for me in some ways, but so is the rest of this country :) Have never voted Republican and can't ever see myself doing so, especially with this group of religious zealots and libertarian whack-jobs

Quote from: Cerulean on January 12, 2012, 03:34:16 PM
I'll vote for Obama again, although in my red state it won't really matter. I cannot believe we still use the Electoral College.

There is obviously a good argument to do away with the Electoral College, especially since we have had presidential elections in which the candidate receiving the majority of the popular vote lost the electoral vote. However, this was part of the compromise which preserved the importance of the states over a more centralized government.  Some of the smaller states would become relatively insignificant if the Electoral College was eliminated.  Iowa and New Hampshire wouldn't matter anymore in presidential politics, for example. There would be a lot of opposition to changing this system.

In my opinioin, The president recieved a harsh first term, but if he is elected a second time, republicans might not as much reason to resist him. In general, you're more willing to negotiate once you know that the opposition is on the way out. As for the time being, further resistance would hurt the republican party more than help in The President's second term.

If Stephen Colbert ends up getting the nomination for the Republican party, I will switch parties.

Quote from: Wessik on January 15, 2012, 04:33:06 AM
In my opinioin, The president recieved a harsh first term, but if he is elected a second time, republicans might not as much reason to resist him. In general, you're more willing to negotiate once you know that the opposition is on the way out. As for the time being, further resistance would hurt the republican party more than help in The President's second term.

He inherited two ongoing wars and the worst recession in 70(?) years and the biggest national debt in the world. Not an easy starting point.

Quote from: Tank on January 15, 2012, 08:58:41 AM
He inherited two ongoing wars and the worst recession in 70(?) years and the biggest national debt in the world. Not an easy starting point.

This is such an important point but would he have got into office if his campaign had been gloom with the promise of everything being sorted in the future?

Hmm...I suppose not. At the same time, I imagine the president's intentions to be sincere. Much can be said for his being fairly new to the job. It could easily be argued that, given his relative inexperience, the president is just getting warmed up. :)

Quote from: Wessik on January 16, 2012, 10:56:54 PM
Hmm...I suppose not. At the same time, I imagine the president's intentions to be sincere. Much can be said for his being fairly new to the job. It could easily be argued that, given his relative inexperience, the president is just getting warmed up. :)

I certainly hope so.  I voted for Obama the first time, despite my misgivings about his lack of experience and his poor Congressional voting record, partly because McCain was packaging himself as Bush 2.0 but mostly because the idea of Palin being one breath away from the Presidency terrified me.  I'd love to vote for someone this time rather than against the opposition.

Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on January 17, 2012, 12:44:51 AM
I certainly hope so.  I voted for Obama the first time, despite my misgivings about his lack of experience and his poor Congressional voting record, partly because McCain was packaging himself as Bush 2.0 but mostly because the idea of Palin being one breath away from the Presidency terrified me.  I'd love to vote for someone this time rather than against the opposition.

Yeah he probably would have gotten in whatever his campaign. People outside the States like Obama and therefore has helped with the foreign perspective on America just for being in office which was truly needed after the two terms of Bush. The republicans do not seem to be doing themselves any favors since Palin getting some light, the party has began to look like a circus act of uneducated, inbred, religious zealots. I was shocked watching Paxman on Newsnight annihilate one of the hopeful republican candidates (cant remember his name but wasn't particularly popular) with ease, it was embarrassing and he seemed like one of the more rounded individuals.

They represent their constituency.  :-X