USPO Republican Presidential Candidate Poll 10/09/07 - Page 4 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

partofme · #46 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

Can someone explain to me how straw polls work? Who are these straw people? Because according to those, Ron Paul kicks ass.

I'm not sure about all of them but in the Iowa straw poll you have to donate thirty bucks to the republican party of Iowa to take part in it.

Steve · #47 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

Ok, it's the Terrorists 1 Giuliani 0. There isn't anything Giuliani could have done about 9/11. That's my point. He's given points for simply being the mayor of the city that got attacked. It follows no logic.

Okay, so you admit to being wrong about the first attack. That's a positive first step.

Now, let's look at 9/11.

You say it's "1-0" in favor of the terrorists. That simply doesn't make sense. There was nothing he could've done to prevent it.

If I visit Toronto, and drill through one of the glass floors of the CN Tower and piss through it, it would make as much sense to blame you for that as it does to blame Giuliani for 9/11.

But, as you've admitted, there's nothing he could've done about it, yet you still hold him accountable for it, as evidenced by your clever "scoring".

You're not being clear. Blame lies somewhere. According to youor scoresheet, it belongs with Giuliani, yet your assertion that there was nothing he could do about belies that...

Quote:

But since he's so pro-war and shows such a lack of understanding about the Middle East, that makes him unsuitable for office. Plus, the only problem he sees with America is that it needs to be more optimistic. He's just another big bad sentimental Republican who thinks that faith and sentiment are good substitutes for actual strategy or rational thinking.

Is that, perhaps, why you're scoring one for the terrorists? See, because that would be stupid, too...

Quote:

You all should be so proud that I would vote for Ron Paul for president. I'm a lefty, but Paul stands by all the traditional Republican values, which I find to be very noble.

I'm proud that you're not an American. I believe your "world-view" is so skewed as to be unreasonable. That's evidenced by your initially wanting to blame Giuliani for two terrorist attacks, only to be shown that he had no impact, one way or the other, on either of them...

jviehe · #48 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

The problem with Ron Paul isn't his position on different issues. his problem is that, every time he opens his mouth, he sounds like a whiney lunatic.

American voters will never elect someone like that to the Presidency...

My problem with Ron Paul is that he thinks we should fight the terrorists at home instead of abroad and that we need to say "i declare war" in order to go to war.

AjaxPress · #49 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by jviehe

My problem with Ron Paul is that he thinks we should fight the terrorists at home instead of abroad and that we need to say "i declare war" in order to go to war.

What's wrong with eliminating the ambiguity between "police action" and "official war declaration"?

partofme · #50 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by jviehe

My problem with Ron Paul is that he thinks we should fight the terrorists at home instead of abroad and that we need to say "i declare war" in order to go to war.

I think that in a emergency the president should have temporary powers to respond but a declaration is the constitutional thing to do.

White Rabbit · #51 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by partofme

I'm not sure about all of them but in the Iowa straw poll you have to donate thirty bucks to the republican party of Iowa to take part in it.

And by tradition, the candidate one is supporting will pay this fee on your behalf.

And a 'straw poll' is different because you are only able to choose one candidate (like choosing straws). This is quite unlike regular 'primary' votes where one can register a vote for more than one candidate (1st choice, 2nd choice, etc).

Si modo · #52 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Rabbit

And by tradition, the candidate one is supporting will pay this fee on your behalf.

And a 'straw poll' is different because you are only able to choose one candidate (like choosing straws). This is quite unlike regular 'primary' votes where one can register a vote for more than one candidate (1st choice, 2nd choice, etc).

Huh, I've voted in three presidential primaries in three different states. I've only been allowed to cast one vote for a party's candidate. I don't recall any ranking system in any of those three states.

Jason Marcel · #53 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Okay, so you admit to being wrong about the first attack. That's a positive first step.

Now, let's look at 9/11.

You say it's "1-0" in favor of the terrorists. That simply doesn't make sense. There was nothing he could've done to prevent it.

If I visit Toronto, and drill through one of the glass floors of the CN Tower and piss through it, it would make as much sense to blame you for that as it does to blame Giuliani for 9/11.

But, as you've admitted, there's nothing he could've done about it, yet you still hold him accountable for it, as evidenced by your clever "scoring".

You're not being clear. Blame lies somewhere. According to youor scoresheet, it belongs with Giuliani, yet your assertion that there was nothing he could do about belies that...

Is that, perhaps, why you're scoring one for the terrorists? See, because that would be stupid, too...

I'm proud that you're not an American. I believe your "world-view" is so skewed as to be unreasonable. That's evidenced by your initially wanting to blame Giuliani for two terrorist attacks, only to be shown that he had no impact, one way or the other, on either of them...

No, my point is that Giuliani gets credit for stuff that was out of his hands. He's not strong on terrorism. He hasn't done anything about terrorism. He has no record. All he does is whine about Hillary. And he whines about Democrats as big spenders, yet, which party is the big spending party? From the 80's to now, it's the Republicans.

Giuliani doesn't get any points from me just because he's the mayor of the city that got attacked on 9/11. Plus he was trying to litigate stuff as a diversion from actually doing good, like going after art galleries for work that he thought was offensive. How childish.

Jason Marcel · #54 (**permalink**) 10-10-2007

Ron Paul isn't saying we should fight terrorists over here. This whole "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" thing is such b.s.

Paul is suggesting that by getting out of the Middle East altogether and having constant negotiation with all countries and friendly relations is the only way to make terrorism go away. And that's true.

Some of you still have this opinion that terrorists hate you just because you're the almighty American empire. No, they hate you because you're over there, in Saudi Arabia, and in Iraq, and biased towards Israel. America should stand back and have no entanglements with any of those countries, Israel has nukes and can defend itself, and America would then have it's credibility back and be able to act as a moderator instead of as an imperialist aggressor.

jviehe · #55 (**permalink**) 10-11-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by partofme

I think that in a emergency the president should have temporary powers to respond but a declaration is the constitutional thing to do.

How do you figure? I can find no section of the constitution requiring congress to declare war by saying "i declare war". The format of congress issuing authorization for an invasion is not specified.

moon · #56 (**permalink**) 10-11-2007

Quote:

Paul is suggesting that by getting out of the Middle East altogether and having constant negotiation with all countries and friendly relations is the only way to make terrorism go away. And that's true.

Yes, it is. Yanqui go home. That means YOU !

White Rabbit · #57 (**permalink**) 10-11-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Si modo

Huh, I've voted in three presidential primaries in three different states. I've only been allowed to cast one vote for a party's candidate. I don't recall any ranking system in any of those three states.

I understand the Democratic primary in New Hampshire works this way - a vote of 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices.

It certainly wouldn't surprise me if the primary process is different in every one of the States. Indeed, it wouldn't surprise me if there were differences between Democratic primaries and Republican primaries in the same State.

I'm no expert on this particular topic. It would be nice if someone around here was and could address this issue.

View Poll Results: Who would you vote for if you were to vote in a Republican primary tomorrow?
Sam Brownback	0	0%
Rudy Giuliani	4	17.39%
Mike Huckabee	3	13.04%
Duncan Hunter	1	4.35%
John McCain	2	8.70%
Ron Paul	8	34.78%
Mitt Romney	1	4.35%
Tom Tancredo	0	0%
Fred Thompson	4	17.39%
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll

Bookmarks
Digg	del.icio.us	StumbleUpon	Google

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode