View Poll Results: Who would you most likely support?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Ron Paul

    23 40.35%
  • Sarah Palin

    2 3.51%
  • Newt Gingrich

    6 10.53%
  • Mitt Romney

    6 10.53%
  • Gary Johnson

    1 1.75%
  • Bobby Jindal

    2 3.51%
  • Mike Huckabee

    2 3.51%
  • Jeb Bush

    2 3.51%
  • Paul Ryan

    2 3.51%
  • Other conservative or libertarian candidate

    11 19.30%
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 72

Thread: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    11-20-14 @ 05:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    316
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    I like Gary Johnson too but the problem with Gary Johnson is a similar problem Ron Paul has. Rather than not support something on a free market or nonaggression principle, he'll politicize it and try to make himself seem righteous and morally superior.

  2. #22
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Seen
    08-29-10 @ 09:24 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    Ron Paul has my vote, if he wins the primaries.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Seen
    08-17-10 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    151

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    Paul can't win. He's too weird. Romney is the country's only hope. He would fix the econ etc in a year.

  4. #24
    User TripleAgent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Alabama, USA
    Last Seen
    02-15-11 @ 02:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    46

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    Quote Originally Posted by chickie View Post
    Paul can't win. He's too weird. Romney is the country's only hope. He would fix the econ etc in a year.
    He's too weird? Why? Because his arguments actually use logic rather than politics?
    "You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free." -- Clarence Darrow

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,802

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    No one I see there that I would pick.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  6. #26
    Guru
    JohnWOlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    01-17-17 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,594

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    If I did vote for someone besides Obama and it was on the other side, Ron Paul is the only one I would. However I agree that some of the stuff he says is crazy, he subscribes to conspiracy theories more often than not, and while he may be right in many instances, it completely is at odds with Republicans and in most cases mainstream Democrats as well. Some could argue that he is incredibly liberal when it comes to things such as the war on drugs and war in general, but an ultra-con on other things.

    Still, other than the whole being racist and crazy part he isn't to bad.
    "We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan

  7. #27
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    Quote Originally Posted by TripleAgent View Post
    He's too weird? Why? Because his arguments actually use logic rather than politics?
    Too weird because his views are 1. extremist and 2. way too distant from what a vast majority of Americans (and Republicans) believe in.

    And of course he uses "politics" as much as any other politician does. That you agree with his arguments doesn't make them ineherently more logical than anyone else's arguments; this type of condescension from Ron Paul supporters is a huge part of the reason why so many people have come to hate him so much.

  8. #28
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    I've liked Huckabee for quite some time, if he can minimize the Bible-thumping.
    I like Mike Huckabee and I admire Mike Huckabee, but I could never vote for Mike Huckabee.

    My pick out of the candidates listed would be Mitt Romney. I could support Newt Gingrich, but frankly all his talk about "paganism" frightens me.
    Last edited by Korimyr the Rat; 08-07-10 at 05:29 PM.

  9. #29
    User TripleAgent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Alabama, USA
    Last Seen
    02-15-11 @ 02:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    46

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    Too weird because his views are 1. extremist and 2. way too distant from what a vast majority of Americans (and Republicans) believe in.

    And of course he uses "politics" as much as any other politician does. That you agree with his arguments doesn't make them ineherently more logical than anyone else's arguments; this type of condescension from Ron Paul supporters is a huge part of the reason why so many people have come to hate him so much.
    To your first point, just how are his views extremist? It seems to me that politicians who want to invade third-world countries willy-nilly without a declaration of war are extremist. It seems to me that politicians who want the Federal Reserve, a private institution, to govern the value of our currency, are extremist. It seems to me that politicians who support a failing and pointless "War on Drugs" that have cost the taxpayers millions of dollars are extremist. And it seems to me that politicians that don't recognize the danger of "blowback" in the interferece in foreign affairs are extremist.

    To your second point, where do you get your information as to what a majority of Americans and Republicans believe in? So few people vote in elections and polls, it really is hard to tell, and I don't pretend to know where we are now.

    However, we can look at history. Historically, Republicans like Robert Taft and Barry Goldwater opposed many of the things that today's Republican Party stands for, including interventionism. The election of the far-right Ronald Reagan really pushed the Republican Party into a new era, governed by "Neo-Conservatives." In truth, people like Goldwater, Taft, and Paul were once considered to be quite in the Center of the political specturm. Once the Neo-Conservatives came into power, however, they were painted as "weirdos" and "extremists."

    Final point: You hear an animal quacking. Logic says that it is a duck.

    You see far-left extremists in Iran overthrow a dictator that we help to install, in favor of a dictator that they install. This dictator tries to turn his people against the country that installed the first dictator. Other countries whose affairs we have interfered with also come to hate this country. Logic says that our interference in these countries caused this hatred. This is what Ron Paul says. According to televised debates from the 2008 elections, pretty much every other candidate thought that this idea was nonsense. Giuliani even wanted an apology. You might not see it as that way, but then again, you might not think that the animal is a duck.
    "You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free." -- Clarence Darrow

  10. #30
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: 2012 Poll for those who do not want to vote for Obama [again]....

    Quote Originally Posted by TripleAgent View Post
    To your first point, just how are his views extremist? It seems to me that politicians who want to invade third-world countries willy-nilly without a declaration of war are extremist. It seems to me that politicians who want the Federal Reserve, a private institution, to govern the value of our currency, are extremist. It seems to me that politicians who support a failing and pointless "War on Drugs" that have cost the taxpayers millions of dollars are extremist. And it seems to me that politicians that don't recognize the danger of "blowback" in the interferece in foreign affairs are extremist.
    That's great, but it doesn't matter what it seems to you. Extremism is relative. And relative to the rest of the country, most of Ron Paul's views are extreme.

    To your second point, where do you get your information as to what a majority of Americans and Republicans believe in? So few people vote in elections and polls, it really is hard to tell, and I don't pretend to know where we are now.
    Well, elections are one good indicator. It doesn't matter how many people don't vote, because those who vote are the only ones whose opinions matter, policy wise. And voters (outside of his Texas Congressional district) overwhelmingly reject Ron Paul. Polls also show this, using a random sample of Americans (some of whom don't even vote) to draw conclusions about the views of the country as a whole within a margin of error. In actual scientific polls (and not straw polls which he floods with his supporters), Ron Paul is a distant fringe.

    However, we can look at history. Historically, Republicans like Robert Taft and Barry Goldwater opposed many of the things that today's Republican Party stands for, including interventionism. The election of the far-right Ronald Reagan really pushed the Republican Party into a new era, governed by "Neo-Conservatives."
    "Interventionism" is very broad and general, and not just something most people are either for or against. I don't know why you seem to think that Goldwater was "anti-interventionist", but his Cold Warrior-esque rhetoric was so extreme that it in part led to his defeat in 1964.
    Also, Goldwater supported Eisenhower over Taft in 1952, so I don't know why you'd lump the two together as having one foreign policy.
    Maybe you should read this, which is written from a non-interventionist perspective: The Mises Review: Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus by Rick Perlstein and and

    And finally, "neo-conservative" obviously does not mean whatever you think it means. I suggest you look it up.

    In truth, people like Goldwater, Taft, and Paul were once considered to be quite in the Center of the political specturm.
    This is a very strange thing to say, considering the 1964 Presidential election. Goldwater lost by one of the largest margins ever, in large part because not only was he labeled and considered an extremist, he practically admitted to having extremist views.

    You see far-left extremists in Iran overthrow a dictator that we help to install, in favor of a dictator that they install. This dictator tries to turn his people against the country that installed the first dictator. Other countries whose affairs we have interfered with also come to hate this country. Logic says that our interference in these countries caused this hatred. This is what Ron Paul says. According to televised debates from the 2008 elections, pretty much every other candidate thought that this idea was nonsense. Giuliani even wanted an apology. You might not see it as that way, but then again, you might not think that the animal is a duck.
    You can argue all of this, but logic does not prove it to be true in any sense. In complicated situations like foreign affairs, there are so many factors at play it is pretty much impossible to determine with certainty what causes what and why. Taking one's own views as flawless logic comes across as condescension, which again, is why so many people have come to hate everything associated with Ron Paul.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •