• 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
How about that Linc idea to have a Democratic convention in the summer of 2014 ??
Especially since our voters are "ethnically challenged" as was recently farted by another republican.
We may not live down 2010 in my lifetime, Pero.
W. Virginia and N. Carolina don't look good for my team in the senate.
Dems better start focusing on the local level and build up plenty of secret money like the pubes.

2010 cost you the blue dog democrats, if I remember right 53 of the 63 losses in the House occured in the heartland. In other words they were normally red districts that had turned blue back in 2006. DNCC chairman Casey had a lot to due you your success in 2006 as he recruited a bunch of moderate to conservative, even some pro life Democratic candidates to run in the heartland and they won. But Obamacare and what was perceived as their representatives and senators basically telling the people who elected to shove it where the sun don't shine when the wishes of these constutients were clearly voiced to their senators and representatives, caused their own defeat. I blame Pelosi and Reid forceing these elected officals using strong arm tactics to go against the wishes of the people they represented.

West Virginia has had a long history of voting Republican in presidential elections and Democratic in senate elections and governor. North Carolina is a few years behind Virginia as it moves more toward the Democrats.
 
Could you perhpas open a frickin' book or look at the election returns? California has 55 electoral votes, not 'ninety some'. No wonder you guys can never win an election.

Don't look towards Navy as some sort of standard. ;)
 
"Would you vote for Rand Paul for president?"

I'd vote for Jeffrey Dahmer over Obama.
 
I know. We conveniently don't take kindly to metaphysical abstractions held by someone on the internet who has it all sorted out, until they step into the real world.

You honestly think I don't know the state can force whatever it wants on the people? I was however unaware that it by itself justified anything. Good to know nationalists are ahead of the game on that.
 
You honestly think I don't know the state can force whatever it wants on the people? I was however unaware that it by itself justified anything. Good to know nationalists are ahead of the game on that.

If you can't subscribe to the United States government ever since it's first President, the brunt kick from the government is the only thing you may understand without getting into meaningless dialectics regarding your interpretation of "rights."
 
I don't usually vote at all libertarian or otherwise and a few other libertarians are the same as me on that. Going out to just waste time voting for someone that will lose is not something people generally find pleasure in. As you said it, its only 6-8% of the population and when you figure in how much most people know about the libertarian candidate its a waste of time to even consider doing. Though, I still do it if I'm feeling like blowing the night away voting for hope that certain night, but usually I don't.

IMO there really isn't that much difference between the two major parties. Both are owned by the special interests, lobbyist, big money donors, super pacs, corporations, wall streets firms etc and on and on. This is where they get their millions and billions to run for office. The two major parties owe these people who provide them with tons of cash and you can bet the interests of the monied people will be taken care of way before that of America.

But if the Libertarian Party is to become a viable third party, to counter act all this influence the two major parties cater to, its members will have to start voting for their candidates. The deck is stacked against any third party, I know, I worked for Perot in 92 and 96, it is the Republicans and Democrats that write the election laws and they do so as a mutual protection act. Then there is the money problem, corporations, wall street, folks with tons of cash do not want to start dividing up their bundles among three parties instead of the established two major parties. But independents are a growing group of voters while those who associate/identify themselves with the two major parties have been shrinking. The is a want out there. Back in Perot's day, only 39% of the electorate said they would vote for or support a third party candidate. Today that has risen to 82%, but the candidate would have to be the right one to garner that support.
 
MSNBC and the rest of their crowd need to STFU about telling repubs what they must do to get better.
The next thing you know, they're starting to do it, not that I'm critical of you.
Matthews was non-stop focus on RepubLies today and their many wings. Let them continue to eat their own.
Dems need to clean up their own messes before 2014, or they'll lose the Senate.
Could you perhpas open a frickin' book or look at the election returns? California has 55 electoral votes, not 'ninety some'. No wonder you guys can never win an election.
 
If you can't subscribe to the United States government ever since it's first President, the brunt kick from the government is the only thing you may understand without getting into meaningless dialectics regarding your interpretation of "rights."

No, its because that is all you have. You can't challenge me on the merits of my argument so you have to lean on the force of the government. Its called a weakness and you suffer from it. It's also called a really piss poor excuse of an argument, but you already knew that.
 
So would Jerry Sandusky, and the governor who delayed his arrest, Corbett.
"Would you vote for Rand Paul for president?"

I'd vote for Jeffrey Dahmer over Obama.
 
Has Rand Paul ever appeared with Mitch McConnell ??
Of the 33 seats up in 2014, where is Mitch ??
 
No, its because that is all you have. You can't challenge me on the merits of my argument so you have to lean on the force of the government. Its called a weakness and you suffer from it. It's also called a really piss poor excuse of an argument, but you already knew that.

Oh, there are plenty of merits that can be brought up for the Act. You just refuse to accept any of them. You just can't argue with someone who refuses to play by the rules of the game. The only recourse in that is brute force to ensure that you do.
 
Oh, there are plenty of merits that can be brought up for the Act. You just refuse to accept any of them. You just can't argue with someone who refuses to play by the rules of the game. The only recourse in that is brute force to ensure that you do.

You can't even help yourself, can you? That is again no argument. How many pages are you going to do this worthless trash?
 
You can't even help yourself, can you? That is again no argument. How many pages are you going to do this worthless trash?

I'll probably stop for a while so I can read. Even someone so out of touch with reality loses some allure for a while.
 
I would never vote for a Libertarian or a Republican.
 
I'll probably stop for a while so I can read. Even someone so out of touch with reality loses some allure for a while.

Yeah, you do that lack of argument boy.
 
Has Rand Paul ever appeared with Mitch McConnell ??
Of the 33 seats up in 2014, where is Mitch ??

McConnell is up for re-election in 2014. I never much followed Kentucky Politics, but it would be quite interesting to see a Judd vs. McConnell race for the Senate. No wonder Rove is trying to work his magic there. When it comes to the senate, there is only one person above McConnell that I would want to see defeated more, that is Reid. IMO, both Reid and McConnell put the needs of their party and their parties future way above America's.
 
This is what Rove is trying to stop, the Saron Angle's of the world. He's after King in Iowa and Broun in Georgia.
Have you noticed the new gang of 4, including my man Coburn ??
Also, Kirk from my state is part of that gun crew and will probably get reelected here based on the sympathy vote, like Johnson did in SD.
Johnson's seat is history. That makes minus 3 so far for sure for Senate Dems.

McConnell is up for re-election in 2014. I never much followed Kentucky Politics, but it would be quite interesting to see a Judd vs. McConnell race for the Senate. No wonder Rove is trying to work his magic there. When it comes to the senate, there is only one person above McConnell that I would want to see defeated more, that is Reid. IMO, both Reid and McConnell put the needs of their party and their parties future way above America's.
 
This is what Rove is trying to stop, the Saron Angle's of the world. He's after King in Iowa and Broun in Georgia.
Have you noticed the new gang of 4, including my man Coburn ??
Also, Kirk from my state is part of that gun crew and will probably get reelected here based on the sympathy vote, like Johnson did in SD.
Johnson's seat is history. That makes minus 3 so far for sure for Senate Dems.

I don't know. It is way too early to tell. Last January/February time frame it looked like a cinch that GOP would easily pick up 6 senate seats. That didn't happen, in fact they lost a net of two. Sit back and relax, we will take this up about this time next year. You came out on top in 2012, 2014 is another year. On the Democtratic side, I plan on keeping an eye on Begich, Pryor, Landrieu, Baucus,Hagan, Johnson, and who ever runs in West Virginia. On the Republican side I think McConnell could be had, he only won by 6 points in his last race and he can irratate people, Shaheen in NH, and a long shot, but possible is Georgia. But like I said, back in early 2012, it looked almost a foregone conclusion the GOP would take back the senate. Things change. Even if the GOP does, 2016 should be an excellent year for the Dems.
 
This is what Rove is trying to stop, the Saron Angle's of the world. He's after King in Iowa and Broun in Georgia.
Have you noticed the new gang of 4, including my man Coburn ??
Also, Kirk from my state is part of that gun crew and will probably get reelected here based on the sympathy vote, like Johnson did in SD.
Johnson's seat is history. That makes minus 3 so far for sure for Senate Dems.

Oh, I forgot. If Broun wins the nomination and the Democrats are smart enough to nominate a south georgia boy and not someone from around Atlanta, I would wager on the Democrat.
 
On the outside for 2016 maybe. But these are the 2010 winners. 24 Republicans, but most are safe. 10 Dems and most are precarious. I do trust in Schumer.
However, I'm already calling NC, WV, and SD for the pubes. No dem pick-ups yet.
I don't know. It is way too early to tell. Last January/February time frame it looked like a cinch that GOP would easily pick up 6 senate seats. That didn't happen, in fact they lost a net of two. Sit back and relax, we will take this up about this time next year. You came out on top in 2012, 2014 is another year. On the Democtratic side, I plan on keeping an eye on Begich, Pryor, Landrieu, Baucus,Hagan, Johnson, and who ever runs in West Virginia. On the Republican side I think McConnell could be had, he only won by 6 points in his last race and he can irratate people, Shaheen in NH, and a long shot, but possible is Georgia. But like I said, back in early 2012, it looked almost a foregone conclusion the GOP would take back the senate. Things change. Even if the GOP does, 2016 should be an excellent year for the Dems.
 
On the outside for 2016 maybe. But these are the 2010 winners. 24 Republicans, but most are safe. 10 Dems and most are precarious. I do trust in Schumer.
However, I'm already calling NC, WV, and SD for the pubes. No dem pick-ups yet.

In 2012, I didn't put much stock in the split ticket voters, I'll not make the same mistake again in 2014. But I wonder how much Akin and Mourdock idiotic statements cost the GOP. I mean not only in Indiana and Missouri, but in Montana, North Dakota, perhaps Virginia and WIsconsin. Their loses in Virginia and Wisconsin couldn't be attributed to poor candidates, Allen and Thompson were probably the best the GOP could come up with. Same in Florida with Connie Mack. I especially liked Thompson. In West Virginia, who knows, the Dems could come up with another Manchin and keep that seat. In NC, I agree Hagan is in trouble and I'm not about to predict another Dakota yet, I got burned on North Dakota last year. Until I get a good look at the candidates, no predictions yet.
 
I would never vote for a Libertarian or a Republican.

you cannot vote in American elections so who cares?

I would vote for Rand Paul over any of the likely dems because Rand Paul is pro gun owner and pro tax payer

However, I Hope Rob Portman is the GOP candidate

David Broder-soon before he died, predicted Portman as the most likely next president if Obama won re-election
 
Could you perhpas open a frickin' book or look at the election returns? California has 55 electoral votes, not 'ninety some'. No wonder you guys can never win an election.

55 or 98 even someone like you gets the picture
 
Back
Top Bottom