Jump to content

Republican Party .... who you got ?


Ocforums

Recommended Posts

just curious what some of the UFC members are thinking bout the Republican hopefuls lately.. and who youd vote for at this point in the race ..

 

 

im personally going to go with what in my opinion seems to be the most conservative runner in this debate .. good ol ron paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

even though i think politics are a joke .. if we really give up on it then we are doomed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im personally going to go with what in my opinion seems to be the most conservative runner in this debate .. good ol ron paul

 

Ron Paul is the ONLY conservative running. The others are fakes, neo-cons. Aggressive foreign policy has always been a product of the global liberal agenda. When disenfranchized democrats moved to the republican party in the 60's, they brought their psuedo-theocratic policy of manifest destiny with them. The Republican Party has been consumed by it since the days of Reagan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron Paul is the ONLY conservative running. The others are fakes' date=' neo-cons. Aggressive foreign policy has always been a product of the global liberal agenda. When disenfranchized democrats moved to the republican party in the 60's, they brought their psuedo-theocratic policy of manifest destiny with them. The Republican Party has been consumed by it since the days of Reagan.[/quote']

 

Ron Paul

 

These.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a very firm supporter of Mitt Romney. I find it truly unfortunate that so many within my party seem either unable or at least unwilling to look past his religious beliefs. But when we as a party have catered to the Christian Right, it is not surprising to see major backlash over someone who is a non-Christian in the traditional sense of the word (yes I am aware The Church of Latter-Day Saints is an off shoot of Christianity). Never the less, I view him as the most electable and ultimately the most potentially effective nomination for Presidency.

 

I know there is a growing Ron Paul movement within the youth sector, and I feel he's a good representative of the Libertarian Party - however their views on not only drug usage but more alarming for me is their platforms on centralized law and intelligence agencies (FBI & CIA notably) simply conflict with me on an important issue in my book. And without sounding too dismissive - no Libertarian is electable to hold national office - at least right now. That's not to say that the only way to make an impact or champion change for the better is to win every battle, I'm simply pointing out that a vote for Ron Paul may make a statement in the short term, but ultimately it will carry no weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really liking Cain at this point seems like a real person not fake.

 

Anyone BUT Obama in office that's for sure.

 

Oh come now, I can't imagine endorsing our current President for another term, but let's not rush to hyperbole. Obama is far from the worst potential nominee in the next election. I feel one of the most poisonous elements in our current political picture is people's desire to rush to extremes when dealing with opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Herman Cain was a Director of the Federal Reserve, and he still sympathizes with it. The Fed is perhaps the most unconstitutionally dangerous element in progressive politics; there is no excuse for any real conservative to support such an outrageous institution even a little.

 

To make things worse, he supported NAFTA & GATT, two of the most non-free trade free trade agreements ever.

 

To be blunt, Cain is a neo-con like most of the other candidates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kapst - I would point out this question was posed as Republicans, not necessarily conservatives. There is a difference. One could be a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican.

 

Just clarifying as you've now twice brought up the issue of conservatism in this thread alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kapst - I would point out this question was posed as Republicans' date=' not necessarily conservatives. There is a difference. One could be a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican.

 

Just clarifying as you've now twice brought up the issue of conservatism in this thread alone.[/quote']

 

Yes, there's a difference, and more people should take note of that! The point is that a majority of Republicans will proudly proclaim themselves conservatives while belittling all things "liberal". Yet, many of the same folks [perhaps hypocritically] support obvious closet neocons like Herman Cain or Rick Perry, et al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a very firm supporter of Mitt Romney. I find it truly unfortunate that so many within my party seem either unable or at least unwilling to look past his religious beliefs. But when we as a party have catered to the Christian Right' date=' it is not surprising to see major backlash over someone who is a non-Christian in the traditional sense of the word (yes I am aware The Church of Latter-Day Saints is an off shoot of Christianity). Never the less, I view him as the most electable and ultimately the most potentially effective nomination for Presidency.

 

I know there is a growing Ron Paul movement within the youth sector, and I feel he's a good representative of the Libertarian Party - however their views on not only drug usage but more alarming for me is their platforms on centralized law and intelligence agencies (FBI & CIA notably) simply conflict with me on an important issue in my book. And without sounding too dismissive - no Libertarian is electable to hold national office - at least right now. That's not to say that the only way to make an impact or champion change for the better is to win every battle, I'm simply pointing out that a vote for Ron Paul may make a statement in the short term, but ultimately it will carry no weight.[/quote']

 

~Pancakes~

 

While I agree with you that the focus on Romney's religious views is ridiculous. I feel you may be overstating its importance, as I know that the biggest issue I have with Romney is how readily he changes his stance on issues if it will help his electability. A true politician is what I would call him. He is a bit of a pancake (likes to be flipped).

 

But you are right he is one of the most electable candidates currently running.

 

Also I disagree with you on Paul's electability against Obama. However, he probably will not get that far :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

after taking a macro class it really opened up my eyes .. not to mention its actually bout dam time we make some drastic changes ..

 

pimp slap the fed and end the wars overseas Mr. Paul .. thats what id like to actually see get done .. all the other promises and if i were president rants to me are garbage ..

 

to me they are all BS'ers ..just gotta pick the best one that actually might change some things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a tough one. There is no real stand-out, but with the current occupant of the White House, they all look pretty good.

 

Too bad the most qualified person currently available to fix our national problems is not going to run. Because this person has already:

 

lowered taxes,

cut spending,

lowered unemployment,

exposed political corruption (even in their own party,)

broke up the cozy relationship between mega-corporations and politicians,

skillfully negotiated beneficial trade deals with foreign countries,

and has been an outspoken proponent of utilizing our natural resources.

 

Everything our country needs, from a domestic standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a tough one. There is no real stand-out' date=' but with the current occupant of the White House, they all look pretty good.

 

Too bad the most qualified person currently available to fix our national problems is not going to run. Because this person has already:

 

lowered taxes,

cut spending,

lowered unemployment,

exposed political corruption (even in their own party,)

broke up the cozy relationship between mega-corporations and politicians,

skillfully negotiated beneficial trade deals with foreign countries,

and has been an outspoken proponent of utilizing our natural resources.

 

Everything our country needs, from a domestic standpoint.[/quote']

 

Sarah Palin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a republican, but I will admit that while I still disagree with Romney on some points, I can at least trust that he has a strong acumen that would be able to run the US effectively... also, he seems grounded and realistic in his approach to politics, rather than a lot of the other candidates that would intend to try to flip the government head over heels with overly ambitious policies...

 

it's a shame that those probably most fit to lead most likely won't...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just curious what some of the UFC members are thinking bout the Republican hopefuls lately.. and who youd vote for at this point in the race ..

 

 

im personally going to go with what in my opinion seems to be the most conservative runner in this debate .. good ol ron paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

even though i think politics are a joke .. if we really give up on it then we are doomed

 

Why are you going to vote for the most conservative runner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoever voted for Bachmann is either a troll or a retard.

 

Sillly goose.

 

Bachmann is the most conservative candidate out of all the choices with a congressional record to prove it.

 

She's the only one whom I would trust, among other things, to preserve the Second Amendment, prosecute Islamic Terrorism where it threatens US interests, defend Israel from it's fundamentalist, murderous neighbors, now that Obama has overthrown key former secular leaders in his Arab Spring, lower taxes, and cut Federal spending.

 

Try to think for yourself sometime. It will hurt at first because you're not used to it, but then you will begin to see the light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sillly goose.

 

Bachmann is the most conservative candidate out of all the choices with a congressional record to prove it.

 

She's the only one whom I would trust' date=' among other things, to preserve the Second Amendment, prosecute Islamic Terrorism where it threatens US interests, defend Israel from it's fundamentalist, murderous neighbors, now that Obama has overthrown key former secular leaders in his Arab Spring, lower taxes, and cut Federal spending.

 

Try to think for yourself sometime. It will hurt at first because you're not used to it, but then you will begin to see the light.[/quote']

 

The republican agenda is just as liberal as the democratic agenda, they should quit using "conservative".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Libertarianism seems a lot better than it actually is.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an1oTKultQA&feature=related

 

Authoritarianism seems a lot better than it actually is.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waI4aq-Rf0o

 

 

Very true.

 

There is a reason the Llibertarian Party received a grand total of about 1% in the last presidential election.

 

yeah, it's called a lack of media coverage & lack of funding by corporate lobbyists & big government shills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how Somalia is relevant to American Libertarianism either. ;)

 

There is not a single country under libertarianism that is doing well. You can say that American Libertarianism is so much better but that would be at odds with every major economist would say today. By the way, socialism has a better track record economically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is not a single country under libertarianism that is doing well. You can say that American Libertarianism is so much better but that would be at odds with every major economist would say today. By the way' date=' socialism has a better track record economically.[/quote']

 

Somalia has nothing to do with American Libertarianism. That was my only point.

 

There isn't a single country under libertarianism that is doing well? Er, there isn't a country in the world under an American-style libertarian government, period. lol

 

And I couldn't care less what most major economists have to say on the issue, because most major economists were brought up in a liberal education system hellbent on propagating keynesian economics, an economic system nearly responsible for ushering in the first global depression. You're throwing them out there as if they're credible!? :o

 

What track record are you looking at in your judgement of Libertarian free markets anyway? Such a system has never even existed. There is no record from which to make such an assumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somalia has nothing to do with American Libertarianism. That was my only point.

 

There isn't a single country under libertarianism that is doing well? Er' date=' there isn't a country in the world under an American-style libertarian government, period. lol

 

And I couldn't care less what most major economists have to say on the issue, because most major economists were brought up in a liberal education system hellbent on propagating keynesian economics, an economic system nearly responsible for ushering in the first global depression. You're throwing them out there as if they're credible!? :o

 

What track record are you looking at in your judgement of Libertarian free markets anyway? Such a system has never even existed. There is no record from which to make such an assumption.[/quote']

 

There is libertarian free markets out there. Look at Somalia and Haiti.

 

Who is propagating keynesian economics?

 

Libertarianism has completely free markets. How does American Libertarianism differ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is libertarian free markets out there. Look at Somalia and Haiti.

 

Who is propagating keynesian economics?

 

Libertarianism has completely free markets. How does American Libertarianism differ?

 

Libertarianism is much more than just free markets. Seriously there are numerous reasons for the problems in Somalia, & none of them have to do with free markets, let alone with libertarianism.

 

If you imply that the situation in Somalia is a reflection of libertarianism itself, then it's just as logical to say that Hitler was a reflection of non-libertarianism. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...