2012 Presidential election thread

[Dak]

Google "Golden Rule gets booed". The longer the day goes on, the returns keep multiplying. This is going to be great for Ron Paul, and horrible for the Republican Party establishment.

 

[King Richard]

Ya, that's the same thing I was thinking when I watched it last night. I told myself, "Are these hypocritical savages seriously booing the golden rule on national television?!" Just another bit of evidence proving just how stupid so many of the citizens of this country are.

 

[Dak]

http://overwatch404.blogspot.com/2012/01/golden-rule-booed-in-south-carolina.html

My take.

 

[Draehl]

Listening to Erick Erickson today and apparently Paul has a rather clever route he's taking here... (And I'm no political mastermind, so bear with me here if I misconstrue something) Apparently over the past several years Paul's campaign has been getting their supporters into power at the local level... to be delegates for other campaigns. By law they have to vote for the candidate they are the delegate for- IE if a Paul supporter is a delegate for Romney they have to vote for Romney at the convention. But if, at the convention, there is not a majority winner after the first vote they vote again (presumably to bring into the fold delegates for candidates who have dropped out, or give delegates a chance to change their minds?). At this point the Paul supporters who were delegates for Romney/Gingrich can change their votes like a sort of sleeper cell. So Paul would get votes from his delegates as well as a portion of the delegates from the other campaigns.

It's crafty and I don't know if it will work, but here's hoping it does. Paul > Gingrich > Romney > Santorum.

 

[Xorv]

The blatant naive idiocy that runs rampant in this country always seems to fully make its presence known every presidential campaign. It's not solely the candidates and their policies that are ruinous for this nation, but the misinformed (and too lazy to be informed) morons that vote for them and the faulty counting system to tally their votes. Ohh what now? Santorum actually did win IOWA? big fucking woop.

words from a politician who'd probably be better for this nation than Romney even though he's dead

Stalin: 'It's Not the People Who Vote that Count; It's the People Who Count the Votes'

Paul > Santorum

Newt = Romney

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

I had a long and disturbing conversation with a close friend of mine last night. He was mostly drunk and ranting, but I finally was faced with the fact of his complete brainwashing. Less than 1 year ago he was fed up with America and wanted to move to Europe. Then, at some point, he decided to volunteer for the Obama campaign. Now he blindly worships Obama and ignores well known facts. He claimed that Obama amended NDAA so it would not effect American citizens. While SOPA was drafted by a republican, he loves it because it's getting democrat support. And my friend goes on and on about how "crazy" and "dangerous" Ron Paul is. I've made my mind up about RP, I'm not going to vote for him. After all, he has shown a propensity for flip flopping, believe it or not. Just consider his amorphous stance on Israel. I like RP's stance on most issues, but not enough to vote for him. Don't worry, I won't vote Obama, either. But I honestly fear that my buddy of over 10 years is being brainwashed by the Obama campaign. He's turned from an anti-establishment firebrand to unthinking "patriot".

 

[King Richard]

^There's a whole lot of wat in that statement. First off, your friend sounds like a dumbass. Just don't take him seriously anymore and it'll be ok. Secondly, what's this flip-flopping you're talking about and his stance on Israel? I don't even know what you're referring to.

Anyway, about tonight's debate, Ron Paul was on fucking fire man. That retort to Santorum when he said, "For the record I wasn't even thinking about you in my statement" was gold. This was by far Paul's best debate. It's unfortunate that the only talking points will be how Gingrich won South Carolina by calling his ex a liar and getting all pissed because he's piece of shit weasel, and how Romney utterly failed to connect with "normal" folk with his dodging of answering when he'll publish his tax records and coming off like the rich snob he is.

 

[Einherjar86]

Personally, I thought last night was Paul at the most mild we've seen him. For instance, on the issue of abortion, Paul basically spewed nonsense about morality for sixty seconds without ever answering the question; because he's deciding to play the political game. In South Carolina, you can't say: "Of course people have a right to choose, what are you, fucking stupid?" So, instead of saying that, he mumbled about individual morality.

EDIT: and Sap, on the subject of your friend; I also have a friend who works for the Democrats in Miami, and he told me that he actually hopes Ron Paul gets elected so that he can watch the system fall apart in a couple years (implying that Paul is a nutjob and his ideas will destroy the country). If there is a "Ron Paul cult," there's also an "anti-Paul cult" going on in young die-hard Democrats.

 

[Dak]

After all, he has shown a propensity for flip flopping, believe it or not. Just consider his amorphous stance on Israel. I like RP's stance on most issues, but not enough to vote for him.

Well I'm not voting because I believe the system is immoral, and won't support it. However, if I did vote, it would be for RP no question. I would love to knowhat issues you think he's flipflopped on, especially if they involve Israel. Even his competition hasn't found reason to accuse him of flipflopping.

Personally, I thought last night was Paul at the most mild we've seen him. For instance, on the issue of abortion, Paul basically spewed nonsense about morality for sixty seconds without ever answering the question; because he's deciding to play the political game. In South Carolina, you can't say: "Of course people have a right to choose, what are you, fucking stupid?" So, instead of saying that, he mumbled about individual morality.

Well it was by far his best performance, since he had time to articulate his views instead of trying to cram. His statements on abortion were an
excellent response. Bottom line is, laws won't prevent them. But the federal government doesn't have to be involved. It needs to be removed as a political platform, especially at the federal level.

EDIT: and Sap, on the subject of your friend; I also have a friend who works for the Democrats in Miami, and he told me that he actually hopes Ron Paul gets elected so that he can watch the system fall apart in a couple years (implying that Paul is a nutjob and his ideas will destroy the country). If there is a "Ron Paul cult," there's also an "anti-Paul cult" going on in young die-hard Democrats.

There's an anti Paul cult in the Republican Party to. It's called the Neo-cons.

 

[Einherjar86]

Well, I don't know if I'd call his response "excellent." It sounded like a lot of filler to me.

 

[Dak]

Well, I don't know if I'd call his response "excellent." It sounded like a lot of filler to me.

It was spot on. He was clear on getting Roe vs Wade repealed, and getting federal funding out of the picture, making the entire thing a non-federal matter. Otherwise, he was making the point that what will prevent abortion is individual decisions, not getting more legislation passed to try and prevent it.

If you will notice, he didn't answer any of the questions with a simple "yes/no I'll do _________", because the questions were almost all asked in an ignorant fashion. The problem is the monetary system and the gross largesse in the federal budget, compounded by over-regulation/legislation in all areas. As I posted elsewhere last night:

"Cliff Notes for CNN debate: Ron Paul gives a quick class on economics and liberty, and the other guys talk about what great wannabe kings they would make."

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

One minute Paul says Israel is an ally and then the other he says they are illegally occupying Palestine. Maybe I should have said he made contradicting statements. Of course, he is just a politician after all.

 

[Dak]

One minute Paul says Israel is an ally and then the other he says they are illegally occupying Palestine. Maybe I should have said he made contradicting statements. Of course, he is just a politician after all.

Technically speaking, Israel is an ally. They are also there occupying Palestine. Those are two, seperately correct statements.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

I thought we weren't allies with regimes that illegally occupy other countries? That was the reason we invaded Iraq the first time.

 

[King Richard]

We actually didn't invade Iraq, we just liberated Kuwait from Iraqi occupation. Besides, the real reason for the US creating a coalition to repel the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait wasn't based solely on the fact that they invaded a sovereign nation. Kuwait, as small as it is, holds the world's top five or sixth largest oil reserves, Iraq being in the top five as well. If Iraq would have successfully occupied Kuwait they would have wreaked havoc on the oil market.

 

[Dak]

However, Iraq claimed Kuwauit was siphoning off of Iraq's reserves, an "I drink your milkshake" scenario, and the US State Dept indicated neutrality on the invasion to Iraq, and then stabbed them in the back.

 

[King Richard]

Yeah, Iraq had a slew of justifications for the invasion, and who knows, maybe they were right.

 

[Dak]

 

[zabu of nΩd]

lol

So, does anyone know if Romney has given much detail on his views on the national security vs. civil liberty struggle? I got interested in him when he started tearing into Gingrich, and was wondering if he might actually be a man of integrity who could do something good for the country.

 

[Dak]

Romney?? At least Newt doesn't flip flop, he rapes you and tells you to like it. Mitt "The Flipflop" Romney does it while telling you anything you want to hear, and in a very "presidential voice".