Posted on 11/06/2012 9:24:31 PM PST by TheArizona
It would seem our libertarian friends pretty much handed the election to Obama. Couple that with vote fraud and hello 4 more years of communism/nazism.
But you all can take comfort knowing you voted your conscience and your vote counted... For Obama...
The Arizona
The problem with that is, they have no intention at all of creating jobs. They want to spend all the borrowed money they can on themselves and their govt. Of course, senile old Uncle Joe will be thrown out of the bus at the nearest stop.
They are the Cloward, Pliven presidency that wants to totally collapse our systems and replace them with themselves at the top with a new system. That system has many names lately, but it's really just communism and it only works for the dictators and the Czars they install.
We were warned a long time ago and America wouldn't listen and stay vigilant. It's always much harder to climb out of a pit than to avoid falling into one in the first place.
Ron Paul would have been laughed off the stage during the first debate. And imagine someone to the left of Obama on foreign policy.
Paul couldn’t win a state-wide election, let alone a national one.
Who would have been doing the laughing though? I've seen more here on FR deriding him [undeservedly] than I have elsewhere.
And imagine someone to the left of Obama on foreign policy.
Even so; why do you think the Congress is involved in Cabinet approvals? To act as a moderating influence against radicalism. (But he's right that we simply cannot afford to be "Team America, World Police".)
Paul couldn’t win a state-wide election, let alone a national one.
Apparently "ABO" really doesn't mean 'Anybody But Obama; I never swallowed that thinking (after 2008 I said I'd not vote for someone simply because "he's not the other guy") and it became clear talking to those who spouted it off that thy really meant something different: what they meant was "vote for the candidate we want you to vote for because he's not Obama."
Fact is Paul couldn’t win the GOP primary - the one where most conservatives vote. Paul won one state.
And you think he could have won a national election?
Pot legalized where you are is it?
:)
Okay, I see what you’re saying. Cases concerning ambassadors and such and ones which states are a party to are the only kinds Congress can’t touch. But there’s another way around this. Some people think, and I tend to agree, that due process requires judicial review.
In the end it comes down to two candidates.
if it comes down to three and two of them are ours, we lose.
So we have a primary to hash and fight it out. To decide who we will send against their candidate. We agree to do our fighting against each other then and live with the results.
If a conservative takes his marbles and goes home pouting after this primary, he or she is just, putting it gently, politically stupid.
It’s a myth that anything short of the U.S. as global cops is “to the left of Obama.” The Warfare State has only been associated with Republicans and therefore conservatives since the New Left pushed what came to be called neo-cons our way. Before that Democrats were the militarists. Our party started foreign adventurism in the Gay 90s, granted, but then again there was no modern conservative movement back when.
I hear that legalized marijuana won in WA. We already had medical marijuana. Now we can begin the same law suits against marijuana that we had against tobacco. Banning it in apts,, condos, bars, etc because the carcinogenic effects of marijuana are the same as tobacco. We will see law suits against companies, hospitals and other businesses because employees come to work high. The lawyers are going to get rich.
The only difference between Obama’s Middle Eastern foreign policy and Bush’s Middle Eastern policy is that Bush’s policy was overt and Obama’s is covert.
When I said only since the New Left, of course one of the three legs of the post-WWII conservative movement was anti-communism (the other two were, for lack of better terms, libertarianism—think Hayek—and traditionalism—think Kirk) and among anti-communists were hawks. But they were not all, and not all of them were foreign adventurists.
Back then we tortured terrorists, and now we assassinate them with robots. Back then we nation built and planned to pull out, and now we nation build and actually start to pull out. Back then we surged in Iraq, and now we surge in Afghanistan. It’s totally different./s
You don’t have to be a global cop to realize it’s not our fault our enemies hate us.
In the case of foreign policy Paul was the wrong messenger with the wrong message.
I am a libertarian on the role of government, particularly in the marketplace and the social welfare net.
On that issue, Paul was the wrong messenger with the right message.
As a national candidate he had no prayer. Likely the worst of the lot, and that’s saying something.
In all fairness we don’t know how many of those who voted for Gary were dissatisfied democrats. I’m a libertarian born of a conservative Republican family, and I voted for Romney. No, he wasn’t the “ideal” candidate, but he had a realistic chance to win. Anyone who throws their vote away on a 3rd party candidate such as a presidential election is a fool. I understand there are certain benefits that come with reaching a certain percentage of the vote, regardless if those who would do so to earn some kind of legitimacy for your sect... your selling us out. By us I mean the American people.
I would urge caution however to not demonize our prodigal brothers and sisters but instead welcome them back to the flock. We need everyone we can to take back power in order to restore this country to a state of stability. Quabling among ourselves will only ensure that the enemies of the USA win time and time again.
Stay strong. Life is short, enjoy the ride, and keep your chin up. There will be a tomorrow and we have to keep fighting if not for our own sake but for the sake of our families and friends.
God bless!
Ah, so now you're shifting from the general election viewpoint to the primary viewpoint...
And you think he could have won a national election?
The GOP is, obviously, different than the general populous so that possibility must exist.
But let's look at the GOP primaries: what does that "bus incident" tell you? What about the teleprompter/voice-vote incident? What about the content of the items voted on?
They tell me (1) that the convention is not as on the up-and-up as many would portray; (2) that the party leaders are authoritarians and elitists [and quite possibly statists]. -- Given both of these facts I'd be surprised anyone with serious constitutional/libertarian/limited-government "could win" the GOP primary.
Pot legalized where you are is it?
:)
No; and even if it was I wouldn't partake: I hate the smell.
More detailed, but I think there's some records/debates concerning the Constitution [and its ratification?] dealing w/ Judicial Review: essentially it was considered but rejected. {Strict Constitutionalism doesn't allow it... of course many 'conservatives' would balk at strict Constitutionalism.}
The primary relates because if he loses miserably in a +100 Rep. sample, how is he going to fare in a +6 Dem sample nationwide?
I’m sorry, it’s just not anywhere near an intelligent proposition.
Refusing to vote for candidate X, but not challenging his legitimacy, is living with the results.
If a conservative takes his marbles and goes home pouting after this primary, he or she is just, putting it gently, politically stupid.
Not necessarily; let's assume that a full 50% of the Republican party decided, as a matter of principal, they would not vote for anyone supporting exceptions [for rape, incest, etc] in illegalizing abortions... if the GOP consistently lost by promoting anyone who supported the exceptions they'd either (a) quit endorsing such people, (b) such people would keep it on the hush-hush, or (c) the party's relevance would decrease.
The only way you have, for certain, to influence party is by support or non-support; providing support when the party violates your core ideals means that the party has no incentive in regarding your core values: they already have your vote.
I don’t think you can blame Libertarians for this fiasco. As a group, they are pretty inconsequential. Also, the socialists are blaming conservatives. Now that is rich, like if we want a Republican to win, we have got to go more left in our ideology.
Well, maybe we don’t need the Republican Party. Maybe, this so called two party system isn’t working anymore. One could argue that there is really only one party..not a dimes difference between the two.
I know I am not a Democrat. And if the Republican Party continues to drift toward the Dem Party, I won’t be a Republican or support it any longer.
Long live Conservatism, the Constitution and the USA. To hell with the Socialists, leeches, race baiters, illegal aliens and the Marxist in the White House. You voted for revenge...karma is hell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.