• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you vote for Rand Paul for president?

Would you vote for Rand Paul for president?

  • Yes

    Votes: 33 37.1%

  • No

    Votes: 56 62.9%
  • Total voters
    89
Navy Pride said:
There is a good chance he is running in 2016. Would you vote for him?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't rule out voting for him. First it all depends on whom the Republican candidates are for the nomination. I would vote for him in the GOP primary if I thought he was the best candidate for the job. In the General it would all depend, here in Georgia who the Democrats run against, who the Libertarian and Constitutional Candidates are.I vote for whom I think would make the best president regardless of party which includes third party candidates. I voted for Gary Johnson last November as I have vowed I would never vote for the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidates just becasue they are of the two major parties.
 
and blew his shot at the Senate with a "Republican" type of brain fart.
That, and Adelson's money in NV kept dems from a clean sweep.
Henrin said:
Ah..no. Richard Carmona is a democrat.
Click to expand...
 
notquiteright said:
Reading comprehension, gotta love it, first I said TURNING not ARE, second I named three states.

I said if the Kings leave another takes it's place, like the Colts leaving Baltimore in the dead of night it was replaced by a team that did something of note this year... what was it?

Be interesting to see who pays off the loan the kings took out when they strong-armed the City into giving to keep them in Sac.
Click to expand...

What are the 3 states? Stern has said he does want to expand so that is out........You really need to do your homework on this if you a Kings fan...
 
NIMBY said:
Kentucky will feel the same way next time.
And Rove is doing Dems big favors trying to trash Judd right now.
Click to expand...

I think you are right. I know Judd was thinking about running, I haven't heard that she will or not. Can you add anything more?
 
notquiteright said:
And it is total nonsense to claim everyone leaving is 'fleeing'. :roll:
Click to expand...

I didn't say everyone is fleeing, but I did say that people that flee something usually aren't that interested in putting in place where they move. The amount they are losing though is telling.

Our nation is one of the most mobile bunch to ever carry the same color passport. one thing I can say about Northern Cali republicans are for all they bitch whine and moan about 'liberals' they are FAR more liberal in many social areas- recycling, pollution, even firearm control than the democrats here in Oklahoma.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough about them to be honest.

Hear me now and believe me later, political parties are not uniform across the nation.
Click to expand...

No doubt. Cultures are not uniform across areas which gives rise to a different views in the majority of the population depending on where you are. It's not surprising it affects parties as well.
 
shrubnose said:
Anyone who thinks that they are doesn't know much about the USA.
Click to expand...

laughing, I get to travel and spend a great deal of time in states across the nation. I talk with, shoot with and hoist a few tasty adult beverages with a wide range of folks. A California Republican is a very pale democrat in Oklahoma...

National leadership is far more lockstep than the typical voter making car payments and worried about his tech job being outsourced to China or India.
 
Navy Pride said:
Can you name a state that is turning Liberal? Arizona voted for the Romney for president and I believe has 2 Republican senators.


The Kings are a done deal they are moving to Seattle....a non refundable 30 ,illion dollars has been passed to the Owners...Do you really think that anyone would pay that kind of money without it being a done deal? If you do I have some waterfront property I would love to sell you in Arizona.
Click to expand...

Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada - all converted. Arizona's next.
 
Wiggen said:
Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada - all converted. Arizona's next.
Click to expand...

Texas in another 10 years? Is it? At the least it will be purple.
 
I supported Hillary in 2008. Against Rand Paul, I'd vote for her easily. I can't think if many I'd chose Paul over.
 
Wiggen said:
Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada - all converted. Arizona's next.
Click to expand...

Why is this a point liberals are proud of? It's not as if its caused by anything they should champion. Sorry, but there is a certain amount of nonsense in this chest pounding going on about this.
 
Navy Pride said:
There is a good chance he is running in 2016. Would you vote for him?
Click to expand...

I most likely would. He tends toward the libertarian side, and would have a far better chance of winning than any libertarian on the ticket ever would.
 
Henrin said:
Yes, we call that a weak argument. You might want to learn some things about property rights before you just go on and on about the status quo being right. Just sayin'

Here I have some homework for you:

Tell why people wanted property protected in the first place. Hell even tell me how it worked in nature if you want and then be sure to tell why that is not the condition we wanted to follow in society. Hell why don't you tell me about how Indians actually owned certain things and how those items were not shared with the general population unless they wished it.

Or you could just admit its a violation of the very foundation of property.
Click to expand...

The more basic lesson is to notice which side holds the most force. The government has declared you do not have a right to do so, and enforces it regularly. Any pitiful response you deliver back to the argument is met with indifference. Without might, you are wrong, or perhaps merely the victim of having no weight.
 
Navy Pride said:
There is a good chance he is running in 2016. Would you vote for him?
Click to expand...

No. Saying he wouldn't vote for the civil rights bills of 1965 were they offered today, is enough for me. Though there are certainly more reasons.
 
Wiggen said:
Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada - all converted. Arizona's next.
Click to expand...

they were already blue but let all the libs move out of California and we can take their ninety some electoral votes.

Arizona has a Republican Governor 2 Republican Senators and voted for Romney???? It is one of the most red states in the country.
 
Fiddytree said:
The more basic lesson is to notice which side holds the most force. The government has declared you do not have a right to do so, and enforces it regularly. Any pitiful response you deliver back to the argument is met with indifference. Without might, you are wrong, or perhaps merely the victim of unfortunate circumstance.
Click to expand...

So no argument from you either then? Good to know. Next time don't bother responding to me if all you have is "you can't do anything about it" nonsense. It's nothing but a waste of your time and a waste of mine.

And btw, I'm not wrong, but good on you for trying that as if it will stick.
 
Henrin said:
So no argument from you either then? Good to know. Next time don't bother responding to me if all you have is "you can't do anything about it" nonsense.
Click to expand...

All I have done is shown that you do not have a right to discriminate. Government declaration met with government force and societal toleration means whatever incredibly silly comment you have is utterly meaningless.
 
Jack Hays said:
He is unelectable so he should not be nominated.:cool:
Click to expand...

It may seem that way now, but one nevers knows what the politico landscape will be in 2016. I really don't know that much about Rand outside he is the son of Ron. I would assume his politics are about the same, but you know what they say about assumptions.
 
Rove is planning another huge buy against Judd. We Dems are excited about that.
If we play our cards right with guns and limit the bill to background checks, Landrieu and Pryor will be safe.
Rove going after King in Iowa is splitting the GOP there also.
Harry needs to give them two bills, so Dem gunners can vote no and then yes.
I think that Dem. rep. from Georgia has a chance for Saxby's seat.
And who knows with Cornyn?? It's past time for him to go.
Perotista said:
I think you are right. I know Judd was thinking about running, I haven't heard that she will or not. Can you add anything more?
Click to expand...
 
Gina said:
No. Saying he wouldn't vote for the civil rights bills of 1965 were they offered today, is enough for me. Though there are certainly more reasons.
Click to expand...



Come on the guy was probably 10 years old then.
 
Fiddytree said:
All I have done is shown that you do not have a right to discriminate. Government declaration met with government force and societal toleration means whatever incredibly silly comment you have is utterly meaningless.
Click to expand...

So even if I show its unjustifed by the working of property, in which I did, than my comment is irrelevant. Good to know you can avoid facts so easily by leaning on government might and ignorance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom