View Poll Results: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016?

Voters
41. You may not vote on this poll
  • Democrat

    6 14.63%
  • Republican

    35 85.37%
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 104

Thread: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016?

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Konig View Post
    Who gets to label what is "true" conservatism? America has a unique brand of it, sure; a brand, however, that looks extensively authoritarian. Europe has fostered the most influential conservatives, from Burke through to Bismarck. The U.S. was a radical project: its founders were radicals, I need not remind you that. The founders were a radical challenge to the Ancien Régime conservatism that dominated Europe at the time. It is obvious, therefore, that conservatives in Europe and the U.S. will drastically differ in the brands of conservatism that they espouse. They share one thing in common that is crucial: the idea that the government needs to institute and uphold some form of morality that regulates behaviour and thought. This is what defines conservatism: the need to conserve traditional social institutions.
    "Conservatives" in the US and Europe differ dramatically on pretty much every level. That's why I said there are no True Conservatives outside of the United States.

    Quote Originally Posted by Konig View Post
    So you espouse protectionism? No global trade whatsoever? How can you ignore the impressive and unprecedented rise of living standards that were experienced due to such practice? How can you deny a man the ability to market his product internationally; the opportunity to learn skills from other countries and cultures? How can you deny American consumers the chance to get the best product at the best price -- in the name of conserving some mystical ideal that is apparently an encroachment on fundamental liberties?
    I espouse total Isolationism. Social, Economic, Military, etc.... I have no problem going back even as far as the living standards of the 12th Century if necessary. Liberty and Freedom are not fundamental. LAW and ORDER are the fundamental ideals of society.

    Quote Originally Posted by Konig View Post
    This quote here by you is an invitation for totalitarianism. I, for one, trust man to make the correct decisions for his life on his own and those that don't should not have to conform, so long as they do not violate the rights of others. What's morally wrong with this principle that seems to puzzle conservatives, whether they're isolationists of the American tradition, monarchists, or neoconservatives that plague political discourse today?
    I for one have total trust in NOBODY. The number that I trust to some degree or another could be counted on the fingers of both my hands while leaving sufficient excess digits to flip the rest of you off with both hands. What you miss is that while my Moral life does not adversely affect the Immoral lives of so many around me; their Immoral lives all too often adversely affect my life. That is what makes their "choices" inappropriate to condone.

  2. #62
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Sřnderborg, Denmark
    Last Seen
    06-01-14 @ 10:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    136

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Liberty and Freedom are not fundamental. LAW and ORDER are the fundamental ideals of society.
    This quote neatly summarises our differences of outlook. I am personally quite conservative; however I afford others the choice to live their life as they wish. The striking problem with this maxim of yours is that many authoritarians, despots and tyrants project themselves as the safekeepers of order in society. And we all know how that ends.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Konig View Post
    This quote neatly summarises our differences of outlook. I am personally quite conservative; however I afford others the choice to live their life as they wish. The striking problem with this maxim of yours is that many authoritarians, despots and tyrants project themselves as the safekeepers of order in society. And we all know how that ends.
    Whereas the striking problem with your view of things is that many who speak of Freedom and Liberty are simply seeking the means to avoid the most basic tenants of Society, Social Order and Morality. Life has never been and hopefully never will be about what we WANT to do. It is instead, and always has been about what we SHOULD do.

  4. #64
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Whereas the striking problem with your view of things is that many who speak of Freedom and Liberty are simply seeking the means to avoid the most basic tenants of Society, Social Order and Morality. Life has never been and hopefully never will be about what we WANT to do. It is instead, and always has been about what we SHOULD do.
    Free people should do what they want to do, they ought to, so long as they do not violate the rights of others. People like you, for whom said actions are none of your business because what happens behind closed doors with no victims doesn't effect you, ought to mind your own business.

    Don't tread on me
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    Free people should do what they want to do, they ought to, so long as they do not violate the rights of others. People like you, for whom said actions are none of your business because what happens behind closed doors with no victims doesn't effect you, ought to mind your own business.

    Don't tread on me
    That's wonderful except that all too often your "Freedom" isn't kept behind closed doors or inside private businesses. All too often it's brought out fully into the open and public spaces, where I do have to deal with it, and the violent nausea that much of it causes me on a daily basis.

  6. #66
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    That's wonderful except that all too often your "Freedom" isn't kept behind closed doors or inside private businesses. All too often it's brought out fully into the open and public spaces
    For example?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    where I do have to deal with it, and the violent nausea that much of it causes me on a daily basis.
    I'm sorry that freedom makes you sick, but merely seeing something doesn't mean you're "dealing with it" nor does it mean its harming you, effecting you in any way or violating your rights.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  7. #67
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,984

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by AJiveMan View Post
    I believe that just because a person is a CEO, a COO of a corporation, or a millionaire, billionaire that's run a corp. or business in the past does not mean they are or have the qualifications or experience to become president (Romney).
    Well first, note that I specifically suggested that experience as a CEO or COO would not, imho, be direct experience but indirect to the specific job of the POTUS.

    Second, the sincerity of your argument somewhat comes into question based on the seeming underlining message based on your words. Your inclusion of millionaire and billionaire (not jobs) mixed in with actual job titles, and your inclusion of Romney as an example of someone whose experience is this is question. It ignores that Romney had what most experts suggest is the closest directly relevant experience to POTUS...being the Chief Executive of a Governmental Entity on the state level, IE Governor.

    Third, I can't help but notice you avoided completely answering the question as to whether or not this seeming standard you are suggesting applies to all jobs, or if you simply have this strange mentality when it comes to the President and the President alone.

    Fourth, there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between talking about qualities or experiences you prefer in a Presidential candidate and qualities and experiences that directly relate as "Experience" to the speciifc job duties of a Presidency.

    I may PREFER that a President has some experience in a private sector company, specifically a small business. However, simply because I'd PREFER they have that experience doesn't mean I'm arrogant enough to believe my preference directly means that's the most applicable experience to being a President. I may PREFER that a President be a historical scholar with a deep understanding of the views and ideas of the Founders. But I'm not going to sit here and try to suggest a Historical Scholar has the better resume of experience speficially related to the task of being President than a Govenor. That doesn't mean I don't think the Historian may not make a better president...experience alone doesn't determine that...but it does mean I'm not egotistical enough to think that simply because I prefer something that magically means it has direct experience.

    Being the Chief Executive of a State Government is directly related experience to the specific duties of being a Chief Executive of the Federal Government.

    Being a Constitutional Laywer may relate to certain aspects of a POTUS's job, but it's not direct experience relating specifically to the day to day duties, responsabilities, and expectations of the job.

    It's perfectly reasonable, in theory, to not like someone with a ton of corporate experience to be President (Just like it's perfectly reasonable, in theory, to not like someone whose never or rarely worked in a traditional private sector job to be POTUS). It's even perfectly reasonable to suggest that such a factor outweighs actual job related experience the person has. But it's just not a logical argument to suggest that the only direct type of experience for POTUS is being POTUS, and every other form of experience is somehow on equal footing.

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    For example?
    For example Gay and Lesbian couples engaged in PDA's in public places. My fiance and I (a heterosexual couple) don't even do that. It's not appropriate, especially in same-sex couples. Having to deal with female police officers, EMT's or other public officers. Those are not appropriate roles for women to be undertaking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    I'm sorry that freedom makes you sick, but merely seeing something doesn't mean you're "dealing with it" nor does it mean its harming you, effecting you in any way or violating your rights.
    Freedom is wonderful in principle, just like Communism is. Unfortunately in both cases once you add the human element, it becomes corrupted. Unfortunately it's not just the private sector that has been invaded by these disgusting instances of impropriety and just plain immorality. Tomorrow morning I will have to go to Town Hall and deal with one of two Town Clerks, both of whom are female. Why?, you ask.... Because the town requires that we license our dog on a yearly basis and the online renewal system is out of service at this time.

  9. #69
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,400

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    That's wonderful except that all too often your "Freedom" isn't kept behind closed doors or inside private businesses. All too often it's brought out fully into the open and public spaces, where I do have to deal with it, and the violent nausea that much of it causes me on a daily basis.
    "violent nausea"

    hahaha

  10. #70
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    For example Gay and Lesbian couples engaged in PDA's in public places. My fiance and I (a heterosexual couple) don't even do that. It's not appropriate, especially in same-sex couples. Having to deal with female police officers, EMT's or other public officers. Those are not appropriate roles for women to be undertaking.

    Freedom is wonderful in principle, just like Communism is. Unfortunately in both cases once you add the human element, it becomes corrupted. Unfortunately it's not just the private sector that has been invaded by these disgusting instances of impropriety and just plain immorality. Tomorrow morning I will have to go to Town Hall and deal with one of two Town Clerks, both of whom are female. Why?, you ask.... Because the town requires that we license our dog on a yearly basis and the online renewal system is out of service at this time.
    So your complaints about violent nausea inducing acts of freedom amount to gay rights and women's rights? Wow...

    How does two men holding hands or sneaking in a quick peck effect you? Have you tried not staring at gay couples? Change the channel if you don't like the tune.

    I'll take a free society where I might see/hear something that grosses me out over an authoritarian one where such acts are criminalized and people are imprisoned for harmless acts of love.

    "l really dig what they do with homosexuals in this country. They put 'em in prison with a lot of other men. That's really good punishment." - Lenny Bruce
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •