• 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!

Republican wins Democratic New York House seat

LesGovt said:
Got it! You would rather vote for someone who cannot possibly win and who will have no impact on the resulting Administration rather than voting for someone, who could.
Click to expand...

You are correct. I am done voting for the lesser of two evils. Each election cycle we've ended up with someone worse because we vote lesser of two evils. Maybe we don't end up with the most incompetent, but it's a downward spiral. It's pointless and it's risking the very future of the Republic. My vote, my choice. Deal with it.

LesGovt said:
I'm glad I don't have to explain why I, in effect, sat on the sidelines and allowed that to happen. I guess we all have our crosses to bear.
Click to expand...

I voted my conscious, for the person I felt was best qualified for the job. Sorry if I discriminate along performance lines. If you want me to support your side, you're just going to have to put up a quality candidate. Till that time, I'm not going to vote for your guy. Someone else may get in, but that's not my fault either. I didn't vote for them. I vote for the one who I feel can do the best job and who will best proliferate the Republic. That has been as of late not the Republocrats. The Republocrats are the party of the status quo, and the status quo currently is broken.

You will not change the status quo by supporting the status quo. To think so is silly.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
I think this was a complete crap argument with nothing of substance to back it up. You're essentially saying that we have to vote Republocrat. That's bull****. Voting for the lesser of two evils (and Obama was that lesser last time) leaves you with evil. The system as set up does not work if I vote for someone I don't like only to keep someone I like less out. It works when I vote for the person I have the most confidence in, who best echos my own political platform, and one whom I would be comfortable with lending my authority and sovereignty to. Sorry if the Republicans can't field such a candidate, but I won't vote for them until they do. Maybe you should stop putting up crappy candidates and then I'd support them. But I'm not going to support any candidate I don't feel would be good for the Republic. Neither Obama nor McCain fit that bill. I'm done voting for the lesser of two evils and watching the Republic suffer because of it. My vote goes to the best candidate, the one who I feel will do the best job regardless of "chances of winning" or other BS crap non-thinkers try to throw out there to stop people from exercising their right to vote for the best candidate and instead accept the lesser of two evils.

I want the system more open, not less. Anything else is retarded and a serious threat to the future of the Republic.
Click to expand...

Where did I say that you cannot vote for anyone other than a Republican or a Democrat? I did not say you had to vote for anyone. If you like "ObamaCare" and programs like it, you are free to continue to vote for whomever you wish.
 
Ikari said:
You are correct. I am done voting for the lesser of two evils. Each election cycle we've ended up with someone worse because we vote lesser of two evils. Maybe we don't end up with the most incompetent, but it's a downward spiral. It's pointless and it's risking the very future of the Republic. My vote, my choice. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Again, you are free to vote for whomever you wish. I have never said otherwise. Just remember that there are real-life consequences to your vote. Your vote. Your choice. Your "ObamaCare. Deal with it.
 
Conservative said:
I am looking at the national polls, Gallup Today, showing Obama with an approval rating of 40% and pointing out that Obama won with 52% of the vote. Then there is the NY 9 race with 4-1 Democrats and a Republican candidate running against the Obama record which the Democrat candidate supported. The Republican took the election 54-46% and was the first Republican that won in that district since the early 1920's. That says a lot, JAR down 12% and losing a 4-1 Democrat District. Love the liberal spin on that one.
Click to expand...

Liberal spin? Come on...... you are the one spining.

Yes Obama won by 52% of the vote... but you know just as well as I do, the % of vote matters jack****. It is the electoral college.

Yes Obama's approval rating is at 40%, and it was over 50% not long ago and it will go up and down over the next year. Like it or not it is a poll of a few people and has a considerable margin of error.

Yes the GOP won a Dem seat... wupti do. There can be many reasons for the change, and yes a "vote against Obama" could be one. But lets again look at the seat.

The former holder of the seat resigned in disgrace. Normally when that happens and there is a new election, then the seat gets gobbled up by the other side.

The district is heavily Jewish. A negative feedback on Obama's Israel policy could be a factor... or it could be a factor that the former holder of the seat was caught exposing himself, and that in orthodox Jewish circles (and other religions) is frowned upon.

And then there is the "I hate Obama crowd". Can that be a factor? You betcha, especially if the "left" dont turn out to vote. And that brings me to another point... what was the turn-out and where was that turn-out? This can have a huge impact on things.. just as we saw in 2008, when the traditional no-show black population turned out in droves and tipped the balance in some areas.

So it is not so simple as you and your GOP friends want it to be.....
 
LesGovt said:
Again, you are free to vote for whomever you wish. I have never said otherwise. Just remember that there are real-life consequences to your vote. Your vote. Your choice. Your "ObamaCare. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

I didn't vote for "Obama Care", sorry. You can't lay it at my feet and try to elicit some form of guilt response. I didn't vote for them. I would not have voted for McCain either as he was just as bad, if not worse than, Obama. No matter what sort of silly argument you want to make, pretending I had something to do with Obama when I didn't support him, it's not true. All you're really trying to do is discourage third party voting, and don't pretend you weren't. To that I say "piss off". You want me to vote for your side, to support your candidate; put a quality candidate out there. Till then, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
I didn't vote for "Obama Care", sorry. You can't lay it at my feet and try to elicit some form of guilt response. I didn't vote for them. I would not have voted for McCain either as he was just as bad, if not worse than, Obama. No matter what sort of silly argument you want to make, pretending I had something to do with Obama when I didn't support him, it's not true. All you're really trying to do is discourage third party voting, and don't pretend you weren't. To that I say "piss off". You want me to vote for your side, to support your candidate; put a quality candidate out there. Till then, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
Click to expand...

I never said you voted for "ObamaCare." Had you and others like you had voted for McCain, we would not have "ObamaCare." Your vote. Your choice. Your "ObamaCare. Deal with it.
 
LesGovt said:
I never said you voted for "ObamaCare." Had you and others like you had voted for McCain, we would not have "ObamaCare." Your vote. Your choice. Your "ObamaCare. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

No, but you're trying to lay blame on me for having voted for a better candidate than your two evils. It's not my fault you didn't put up a better candidate. If you don't want the Democrats to win, if you don't want "Obama Care", then start putting up better candidates. Deal with it.
 
Conservative said:
Those that don't think he has gone far enough are still going to vote for him. In NY 9 the 4-1 Democratic District went 54-46% for the Republican who ran against the Obama record. That is a signal that cannot be discounted.
Click to expand...

I agree they will still vote for him. They just arent going to poll positively for him during the campaign process. He isnt worried about winning their vote...he SHOULD be worried about the independents and the typical working citizen that is not an idealogue but identifies as a democrat. They wont vote against him/for a republican...they just wont bother voting.
 
LesGovt said:
And, some others like you voted for the Libertarian candidate too. And many others sat at home because they could not see a difference. And, some even thought that Barack Obama was going to get this country on a good path to prosperity and good times. Unfortunately, the signs were there and all of you missed them or ignored them. You asked if I was proud to vote for a Retard. The answer is yes. I voted to stop Obama from becoming President. Now, because of those of you who did not vote for McCain, we have "ObamaCare." Would that have happened under a McCain Administration? No.
Click to expand...

The USSC will stop it just like they stopped McCain's attack on the Constitution.

We have a President who apologizes for all of the time for the U.S. Would McCain do that? No. Hmmmm. Libertarian? Ron Paul? Maybe you would be pleased with the apologies. Oh well, I am not. Are you proud of doing nothing to stop that "ObamaCare?" I would be ashamed, but I understand that some do not care whether we have government run health care insurance or not.
Click to expand...

I voted to stop Obamacare in the 00's.
 
Ikari said:
No, but you're trying to lay blame on me for having voted for a better candidate than your two evils. It's not my fault you didn't put up a better candidate. If you don't want the Democrats to win, if you don't want "Obama Care", then start putting up better candidates. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked I did not choose who would run for office. Are you giving me that authority and do you even have the authority to give me that authority? My guess is that you do not; otherwise, you would have already used that authority to have only candidates of your choosing on the Republican and Democrat ballots. I know that I voted to prevent ObamaCare. I also know that you voted not to prevent ObamaCare. C'est la vie! Your vote. Your choice. Your "ObamaCare. Deal with it.
 
LesGovt said:
And, some others like you voted for the Libertarian candidate too. And many others sat at home because they could not see a difference. And, some even thought that Barack Obama was going to get this country on a good path to prosperity and good times. Unfortunately, the signs were there and all of you missed them or ignored them. You asked if I was proud to vote for a Retard. The answer is yes. I voted to stop Obama from becoming President. Now, because of those of you who did not vote for McCain, we have "ObamaCare." Would that have happened under a McCain Administration? No. We have a President who apologizes for all of the time for the U.S. Would McCain do that? No. Hmmmm. Libertarian? Ron Paul? Maybe you would be pleased with the apologies. Oh well, I am not. Are you proud of doing nothing to stop that "ObamaCare?" I would be ashamed, but I understand that some do not care whether we have government run health care insurance or not.
Click to expand...

Voting for your retard would not have changed the level of debt. Voting for your retard wouldnt have changed the global military siuation. Voting for your retard wouldnt have guaranteed we not have a national healthcare plan that was as bad or worse because your retard is a 'maverick' of convenience. Voting for your retard would have been...in a word...retarded.
 
Last edited:
1Perry said:
The USSC will stop it just like they stopped McCain's attack on the Constitution.

I voted to stop Obamacare in the 00's.
Click to expand...

I hope you are correct in your first point. As to the second one, are you saying that you voted for a Republican in the Illinois Senate race? If yes, what about 2008?
 
LesGovt said:
Last time I checked I did not choose who would run for office. Are you giving me that authority and do you even have the authority to give me that authority? My guess is that you do not; otherwise, you would have already used that authority to have only candidates of your choosing on the Republican and Democrat ballots. I know that I voted to prevent ObamaCare. I also know that you voted not to prevent ObamaCare. C'est la vie! Your vote. Your choice. Your "ObamaCare. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

You vote in the primaries? Then you do. Or else, I bear the same responsibility for Obama being in office as you did for selecting who runs for office (but that would be counter to your point since you want to try to play guilt and claim others are responsible for "Obama Care" because they couldn't vote for the main party retards. Way to be honest, I guess you get to be under different rules of constraints that you're going to put others under. Nice, real nice.). You could have done a better job at preventing "Obama Care" by putting up a better candidate. You could have considered which candidate could best reach out across lines and grab the independent or even siphon off some of the third party votes to secure victory and support that candidate. But you didn't. You put up a sub par candidate. Your Obama Care, deal with it.
 
VanceMack said:
Voting for your retard would not have changed the level of debt. Voting for your retard wouldnt have changed the global military siuation. Voting for your retard wouldnt have guaranteed we not have a national healthcare plan that was as bad or worse because your retard is a 'maverick' of convenience. Voting for your retard would have been...in a word...retarded.
Click to expand...

But....but....but......you're responsible for Obama Care because you voted intelligently and for the candidate you could best endorse! Your Obama Care is here because you exercised thought and compared candidates to your political ideology to see which one would best represent you. Your Obama Care because you didn't vote for the status quo which invented it. Your Obama Care because you think for yourself! For shame.....for shame.
 
VanceMack said:
Voting for your retard would not have changed the level of debt. Voting for your retard wouldnt have changed the global military siuation. Voting for your retard wouldnt have guaranteed we not have a national healthcare plan that was as bad or worse because your retard is a 'maverick' of convenience. Voting for your retard would have been...in a word...retarded.
Click to expand...

I know you are trying very hard not to be disingenuous, so I will ask you to prove your comments. Please provide evidence that McCain pushed for items that would have run up the debt as quickly as Obama has? Also, please show us where McCain ever promoted a national health care plan. As for the military, I will give you that one.
 
LesGovt said:
I hope you are correct in your first point. As to the second one, are you saying that you voted for a Republican in the Illinois Senate race? If yes, what about 2008?
Click to expand...

Nope, I'm saying I held my nose and voted for Bush who did at least make great USSC picks.
 
Ikari said:
You vote in the primaries? Then you do.
Click to expand...

No I don't. I did not choose who ran in the primary and I did not vote for McCain in the primary. So now, please tell me how I get to choose the GOP candidate in the primary?

Ikari said:
Or else, I bear the same responsibility for Obama being in office as you did for selecting who runs for office (but that would be counter to your point since you want to try to play guilt and claim others are responsible for "Obama Care" because they couldn't vote for the main party retards.
Click to expand...

Sorry, your initial premise here is incorrect. My premise was that I voted for McCain in the general election and he had a chance to win where Barr and other candidates did not stand a snowballs chance in Hell of winning. Had McCain won, we would not have "ObamaCare." My further premise is that if people like you and Vance had voted for McCain, he could have won and there would be no "ObamaCare."

Ikari said:
Way to be honest,
Click to expand...

I have been perfectly honest.

Ikari said:
I guess you get to be under different rules of constraints that you're going to put others under.
Click to expand...

No, that is false. I am under the same rules as everyone is. If you wanted ObamaCare in 2008, you should have voted for Obama. If you do not want ObamaCare, you should have voted for McCain.

Ikari said:
Nice, real nice.). You could have done a better job at preventing "Obama Care" by putting up a better candidate.
Click to expand...

Again, I do not get to put up the candidate.

Ikari said:
You could have considered which candidate could best reach out across lines and grab the independent or even siphon off some of the third party votes to secure victory and support that candidate. But you didn't.
Click to expand...

I considered that very carefully in both the primary and the general. You are wrong.

Ikari said:
You put up a sub par candidate. Your Obama Care, deal with it.
Click to expand...

No, you know that neither you nor I have the authority to choose which candidates will run in the primary elections or who wins the primaries. We have to make decisions off of who wins those primaries and what they stand for. Some like to take the moral highground of standing on the sidelines by voting for someone who cannot win and allow the worst candidate to win; ergo, giving us "ObamaCare." That would not be me.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
No different than a Democrat in TX vs. one in NY. What does that have to do with the fact that NY 9 hasn't elected a Republican since the early 20's and elected one yesterday?
Click to expand...

The point is liberals in a historically liberal district are not going to vote for a conservative.Just because a politician has a R next to his name does not automatically makes them one of the good guys.

This was Chuck Schumer's former seat. Think about it. I posted the issues and those issues went right after Obama and the Republican won. That speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

The fact a republican won a seat that has been the democrat's for 90 years just means the voters are possible sick of the same old **** and they think that by voting for a Republican **** will change. It does not mean Turner is a conservative.
 
haymarket said:
Conservative

I am on record as advocating that Obama should NOT run again. He should announce soon that he will not stand for re-election and allow others to come forward.

Is it accurate to speculate that if he did that your anti-Obama posts would decrease by some serious numbers - maybe as much as 90% - while you turn your guns on other Dems who may beat your beloved Repubican Party nominee in 2012?
Click to expand...

No, I would be posting against any candidate that you support. Liberalism is a total and complete failure and the Democrat Party is too far left today. I believe in free enterprise and capitalism not liberalism and redistribution of wealth. I have seen what liberals did to your state and a good city like Detroit along with other major cities around the country and as long as the Democrats support that kind of dependence I will continue to post. I am a conservative, not a Republican, something you have a hard time understanding.
 
TheNextEra said:
And you are equating a disapproval of Obama to be an approval of the GOP.Many people are unhappy with Obama because he appeases the right far too often. They aren't going to go out and vote GOP just because of that.I think the right is making the mistake of 04 and being to "sure" that Obama will be ousted like the Dems thought about Bush.If the GOP puts up a "Kerry" candidate, Obama will be in the WH for another 4 years.So far with min wage Perry, flip flop Romney, and bat**** crazy Bachman things aren't looking too gold for the GOP. I think the right is going to "Kerry" this next election.
Click to expand...

As I posted yesterday 20% of the public claim they are liberals, that is hardly a major portion of the country. Most are conservative and then moderates(Gallup Poll-2010). Regardless of what you claim there was no mistake made in 2004 as Kerry was unelectable. I will take any candidate other than Paul over what we have in the WH right now and the results support my opinion. Results matter and Obama has results that the American people are rejecting. NY 9 is s example, first GOP Representative since 1920. 2010 elections, NY 9, Nevada GOP Margin of victory, N.J. Governor, Virginia Governor is a disturbing trend for Obama and instead of listening to the will of the people his arrogance is on full display.
 
Ikari said:
No, it really doesn't. You have no statistics to back the point you're trying to make, you only have 1 data point. Maybe people are pissed at all incumbents, regardless of political affiliation and this change is but the first in an avalanche. Maybe people are just pissed at the democrats; but you can't really say anything with any amount of confidence or significance from one data point.
Click to expand...

Statistics? I have posted data over and over only to be ignored. NY 9 had a Democrat running in support of the Obama record and in a District overwhelmingly Democrat a Republican won for the first time since 1920. The Obama results are a disaster and any Democrat that attaches themselves to those results will be defeated. There is no reason to support 4 more years of Obama.
 
Ikari said:
But....but....but......you're responsible for Obama Care because you voted intelligently and for the candidate you could best endorse! Your Obama Care is here because you exercised thought and compared candidates to your political ideology to see which one would best represent you. Your Obama Care because you didn't vote for the status quo which invented it. Your Obama Care because you think for yourself! For shame.....for shame.
Click to expand...

Lets be honest...it was Pelosi care...just for the sake of full disclosure. But yeah...its MY fault the dems and republicans keep putting those muppets up for election. Its my fault the average dem and rep voter tolerates and endorses those sams candidates.

Im the first to admit my vote for a libertarian or independent candidate doesnt count for much. Still...i vote...and I dont have to feel slimey for associating with either of the two parties. I can live with that.
 
Conservative said:
I am a conservative, not a Republican, something you have a hard time understanding.
Click to expand...

With you is that akin to the difference between six and half-a-dozen? I have seen no evidence from any of your posts that there is any substantive difference with your views and where you fall politically.
 
LesGovt said:
I know you are trying very hard not to be disingenuous, so I will ask you to prove your comments. Please provide evidence that McCain pushed for items that would have run up the debt as quickly as Obama has? Also, please show us where McCain ever promoted a national health care plan. As for the military, I will give you that one.
Click to expand...

What has the "maverick' done about illegal immigration? What has the "mavericks" position been on debt spending? He may not have been the one pushing national healthcare but I dont believe for a second he wouldnt have signed it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom