Anybody who stays home is a worm.
Unless they are a libtard, of course. In which case they are a useful idiot.
Juat goes to show you how long its been, as I just posted this thread using my wife’s ID! Sorry about that ...
Agthorn here .... NOT Lily4Jesus ... ;-)
Juat goes to show you how long its been, as I just posted this thread using my wife’s ID! Sorry about that ...
Agthorn here .... NOT Lily4Jesus ... ;-)
There are times to stay home to make your point.
This isn’t one of them.
I’ll be voting for the candidate whose name doesn’t rhyme with “Obama”. I definitely have preferences, and there are a couple of guys running on the GOP side who I actually dislike. But if their names don’t rhyme with “Obama”, they get my vote whatever happens. I’d rather regret seeing them elected for the next four years than regret seeing Obama returned for another four years.
Lesser of two evils because Obama can’t become the next president... or it’s all over.
If disappointing Perry would change his immigration position he would be a clear winner. He could do that by passing such legislation in Texas as a Governor. His current losing Immigration policy will keep him out and he’s got a lot of making up to do.
I’ll say this: Anybody is better than Obama, even if it’s marginally better Mitt but the larger question begs - why is it always about a lesser of the two evils? Why can’t we have someone whom we can vote FOR instead of voting against someone and turn around and vote for some who’s Obama-lite like Mitt?
every time I watch Chrissy Matthews bash Romney and discuss his chances against Ubama,I want to throw tomato’s at him. When will Chrissy ever discuss Mitt’s chances of beating Obama if Rubio is on the ticket? Hmm,maybe he’s scared of Rubio?
If Romney wins the Republican primary, I will vote for him and will try to convince others to vote for him.
Just like I did for John McCain.
Just like I would do for Pee-wee Herman if he won the primary.
I’ll vote for the lesser of 2 evils. Staying home is basicly voting for the worst of the 2 evils.
Pretty much a no-brainer.
In my experience (watching elections since 1976 and participating since 1984), no Republican candidate (and, tell the truth and shame the devil, not many Democrats) has been “evil”.
I believe it was Reagan who said something like “just because I only agree with someone 3/4 of the time does not make him 1/4 my enemy.”
Someone else said “the perfect is the enemy of the acceptable.”
In 2008 I voted for my first choice, FDT, in my state’s primary (before he quit...all to soon, to my mind). He was imperfect; he was acceptable. Others then running were likewise imperfect but acceptable.
I could not vote in another primary; so, as in about half the presidential elections I have voted in, I then had to vote not for the lesser of evils, but for the least imperfect.
No matter who it was, that one was to be identified by the letter “R”.
In 2008, that turned out to be Palin and the old guy.
I’ve dealt with this same problem in 1996 and 2008. (Been participating since 1984; ‘84, ‘88, ‘92, 2000, and 2004 were all no-brainers to me.)
In each case, my thought was to vote for my principles in the primaries, but against my enemies in the generals.
(I do not use the word "enemies" lightly. I would rather support someone I agree with a third of the time than one I believe intends my country— as I know it— actual harm...one who doesn’t even mean well.)
Results? I did not contribute, by vote or silence, to BJC’s second term, or BHO's first. I expect to continue this policy in 2012.
I am done with the lesser of two evils. I would rather have Obama with a GOP congress than Perry or Romney with a GOP congress. It is my firm belief that amnesty will be the end of this country. I won’t vote for anyone I think would support amnesty. That strikes Romney, Perry, and Gingrich.
I will never stay home, but I’ll vote third party or write-in for president. It doesn’t really matter anyway, because no Republican will ever win CA again, due to the vast illegal population. Which brings me back to “Amnesty will destroy the U.S.”
Anyone staying home next year should be banned from complaining about Obama on this site.
I would vote for BTK killer or madoff over Obama if I had to in order to get rid of MaoBama.
I would not NOT vote.
If the two parties offer Tweedledum and Tweedledee - again - I may vote third party, independent or write in. Not voting may encourage the nomenklatura to think we have given up, or are apathetic. Actively shoving their bowl of congealed slop back in their collective face puts them on notice that THEY are unacceptable. At this point, the only GOP candidates I absolutely and positively cannot vote for are of course Romney, and just for comedy relief, Huntsman and Roehmer.
Yes, I could vote for Gingrich.
Yes, I could vote for Paul.
Yes, I could vote for Perry.
Not happily, maybe not even sober, but I could.
But Romney? No. I will crawl over broken glass to vote AGAINST both Romney and Obama.