Thread: Conservatives, who will ...

None of them have said anything as of yet to inspire.

It is a case of "the devil you know". Also a gop congress limits the amount of damage Obama can do.

I'd vote for Ron Paul. At this point, that might be it.

Romney - used car salesman, no principles

Bachman - bat shit crazy

Cain - inexperienced, and bat shit crazy

Newt - uh if people want to vote for a guy who had to step down in the first place for numerous ethics violations...be my guest

Santorum - lol, I'm from Pa. He couldn't win an election against a demmy who barely campaigned against him. Everyone here hated him...right and left

Pawlenty - doesn't look like a commander in chief to me, but I haven't ruled him out

Originally Posted by gannan

It is a case of "the devil you know". Also a gop congress limits the amount of damage Obama can do.

I'd vote for Ron Paul. At this point, that might be it.

Romney - used car salesman, no principles

Bachman - bat shit crazy

Cain - inexperienced, and bat shit crazy

Newt - uh if people want to vote for a guy who had to step down in the first place for numerous ethics violations...be my guest

Santorum - lol, I'm from Pa. He couldn't win an election against a demmy who barely campaigned against him. Everyone here hated him...right and left

Pawlenty - doesn't look like a commander in chief to me, but I haven't ruled him out

I'd also vote for Ron Paul, but I highly doubt he'll get the nomination. Americans want "looks and charisma" over common sense and decency. That's part of what is going wrong in this country.

Romney - used car salesman, no principles, typical lying politician

Bachman - Very good. No, she's not what you call "bat shit crazy," but she's female and Americans probably aren't ready for a female president.

Cain - He is not "inexperienced," or "bat shit crazy." I'd give him my vote. He probably won't get the nomination, Americans want "looks and charisma" over common sense and decency.

Newt the GOPAC tick, hell no, he is "bat shit crazy," in some creepy ways.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

You vote for ?

Who wouldn't you vote for ?

If Mitt (Mutt) Romney (Rumnuts) runs against King Obama, I will be voting for King Obama. I refuse to vote for another criminal, another liar for "president."

Why replace the liar already in the Outhouse with a new liar ?

.... I can't think of any good reasons. One lying manipulator ... another lying manipulator... there's no good reason to vote for Mutt.

Anybody but Mutt or Barack for me

How 'bout you ?

WAY too early to tell. So best I can do at this point is share my impression of each at this early stage: But these may well change over the next 17 months... and if they all fall to zero, I have voted 3rd party in the past and have no objection to doing so again.

• Romney - The moderate of the group. Won't appeal to the stark right, but just might be reasoned enough to pull in disaffected liberals and independents.
• Bachman - VERRRRRRRRYYYYYY Interesting ... to quote Arte Johnson. Until I saw her perform last night, would not have given her a snowball's chance: Her stock may well rise but enough to grab the independents?
• Cain - Makes a lot of sense but isn't a politician: Does the GOP really want to promote him to the head of the line without some seasoning? I like what he says but I'm not sure whether or not he can pull it off.
• Newt - Definitely one of my top candidates: I've wanted to hear him declare for a long time. However, his top staff abandoned him just last week: We HAVE to want to know why and whether it really is "because he's difficult to handle" (which I doubt as THE reason).
• Santorum - He's a politician. That is a negative in my book. He's won against a few democrats in a democrat area ... but I don't really know anything that differentiates him from others so another "remains to be seen."
• Pawlenty - Like what he's done and what he said last night, but he was stiff like he had a misplaced popsicle stick. I really wanted him to declare because I like what little I know of his work in Minnesota ... but remains to be seen if he can win over voters.
• Ron Paul - Can't win: His own party has marginalized him. That said, however, he showed a lot of spark last night so MAYBE he can pull it out ... but I'm doubting it at this point.

That's all for now.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

I'd also vote for Ron Paul, but I highly doubt he'll get the nomination. Americans want "looks and charisma" over common sense and decency. That's part of what is going wrong in this country.

Romney - used car salesman, no principles, typical lying politician

Bachman - Very good. No, she's not what you call "bat shit crazy," but she's female and Americans probably aren't ready for a female president.

Cain - He is not "inexperienced," or "bat shit crazy." I'd give him my vote. He probably won't get the nomination, Americans want "looks and charisma" over common sense and decency.

Newt the GOPAC tick, hell no, he is "bat shit crazy," in some creepy ways.

Going on national TV and suggesting that members of congress be investigated for un-American activities, screams bat shit crazy in my book (Yes Bachman did that). She also was all over the map on gay marriage. She wants states rights as long as they agree with her, otherwise, she will use the heavy hand of the fed...no thanks.

Cain went off the deep end with his sharia law boogyman and litmus tests for muslims.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

I will be voting for King Obama.

If you do, you will cede all rights to bitch when he ass-fucks this country, and you will assume part of the blame since you will have helped keep him in office.

Are you prepared for those?

Originally Posted by gannan

Going on national TV and suggesting that members of congress be investigated for un-American activities, screams bat shit crazy in my book (Yes Bachman did that).

Call me "bat shit crazy" too then because I do not believe that politicians, these "members of congress," are so far above the laws of America that they shouldn't be investigated and jailed when it is warranted.

Today it is warranted.

Lawmaking has become a criminal enterprise and it needs to come to a stop if we want to keep what we know of as a country called America.

Originally Posted by gannan

She also was all over the map on gay marriage. She wants states rights as long as they agree with her, otherwise, she will use the heavy hand of the fed...no thanks.

"all over the map on gay marriage" :rolleyes:

There's no such thing as "gay marriage" and there never will be

Calling a car a bowl of oatmeal will never make it a bowl of oatmeal you see ?

That there are enough people in America to be confused about such things is only another sign of problems to come. I didn't even watch the "debates," it's too early for this crap. I'm not sure why she would even bring such a nonsensical subject up :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by gannan

Cain went off the deep end with his sharia law boogyman and litmus tests for muslims.

I haven't heard of these things. I guess we'll see what happens with 'em as time goes on.

Romney and Gingrich both have the same problem...they've been "institutionalized" and I'd be loathe to count on either one. Both have a tendency to gravitate toward whatever "principles" are most politically expedient at any given time.

Santorum just strikes me as a dead fish. He really didn't show any true passion for leadership.

Pawlenty is a bit more focused than the others but doesn't seem to have enough backbone to really stand effectively on his principles.

Bachman, Paul and Cain struck me as being the most resolute and the most likely to stick to their guns when the flak starts flying. Paul is a good bit more isolationist than I like. Cain is solid but he's definitely not a politician and hasn't yet acclimated himself to that landscape. Bachman is also a bit "green" but appears to have more "upside" than the other candidates.

I wouldn't hesitate to vote for any of the 7 that debated last night if Obama was the opponent but Romney or Santorum would be my last choice.

Originally Posted by Steve

If you do, you will cede all rights to bitch when he ass-fucks this country, and you will assume part of the blame since you will have helped keep him in office.

Are you prepared for those?

We'll get the same business with numbnuts romney. Does it make a difference to you who is screwing you and ripping you off ?

What ?

Did romney call you and promise to leave a mint on your pillow when he was done or something ?

Originally Posted by gannan

Going on national TV and suggesting that members of congress be investigated for un-American activities, screams bat shit crazy in my book (Yes Bachman did that). She also was all over the map on gay marriage. She wants states rights as long as they agree with her, otherwise, she will use the heavy hand of the fed...no thanks.

Cain went off the deep end with his sharia law boogyman and litmus tests for muslims.

Cain's answer regarding Muslims was definitely his low point. I've listened to him long enough to know where he was coming from but if that was your first exposure to him I'm sure that the answer left a bad taste....and he knew it.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

There's no such thing as "gay marriage" and there never will be

I don't know, Cap'n ... I'm pretty happy in my marriage.

Originally Posted by Good1

I don't know, Cap'n ... I'm pretty happy in my marriage.

What does gay mean what does marriage mean what does it all mean ??

Originally Posted by Good1

WAY too early to tell. So best I can do at this point is share my impression of each at this early stage: But these may well change over the next 17 months... and if they all fall to zero, I have voted 3rd party in the past and have no objection to doing so again.

• Romney - The moderate of the group. Won't appeal to the stark right, but just might be reasoned enough to pull in disaffected liberals and independents.
• Bachman - VERRRRRRRRYYYYYY Interesting ... to quote Arte Johnson. Until I saw her perform last night, would not have given her a snowball's chance: Her stock may well rise but enough to grab the independents?
• Cain - Makes a lot of sense but isn't a politician: Does the GOP really want to promote him to the head of the line without some seasoning? I like what he says but I'm not sure whether or not he can pull it off.
• Newt - Definitely one of my top candidates: I've wanted to hear him declare for a long time. However, his top staff abandoned him just last week: We HAVE to want to know why and whether it really is "because he's difficult to handle" (which I doubt as THE reason).
• Santorum - He's a politician. That is a negative in my book. He's won against a few democrats in a democrat area ... but I don't really know anything that differentiates him from others so another "remains to be seen."
• Pawlenty - Like what he's done and what he said last night, but he was stiff like he had a misplaced popsicle stick. I really wanted him to declare because I like what little I know of his work in Minnesota ... but remains to be seen if he can win over voters.
• Ron Paul - Can't win: His own party has marginalized him. That said, however, he showed a lot of spark last night so MAYBE he can pull it out ... but I'm doubting it at this point.

That's all for now.

The only one would would have a shot is Romney but I doubt he would beat Obama because he and Obama seem to be pretty much the same despite Romney's criticisms criticisms. To be honest, I like Romney as a candidate. I tend to like moderate republicans but unfortunately republicans seem to not like moderates.

On the lies and deception, every politician who has ever held any kind of office lies 40% of the time. 10% of the time they tell the truth. Usually seriously obvious things like, "Health care is expensive." but that is about as much truth as you get out of them. The other 50% are only telling portions of the truth that support their claims and ignoring the multitude of stuff that debunks it.

Gingrich is done. Stick a fork in him. He'll never be nominated. I mean the guy's own staff kinda fired him. Santorum and Pawlenty simply do not have the juice. Obama would cut them to pieces in the debates over and over again and they are too far right for those in the middle.

Paul - Cool guy. I like him but he goes way to far on some things but I do believe that his heart is in the right place. He is just a little out of touch with the mainstream and his son is kind of a whack job so I doubt we will ever see any of the Paul dynasty ever make it to the oval office.

Cain - Relative unknown and many republicans in this country do not like black people (just a fact it--is actually a fairly sizable demographic for the right). Look what they did to Colon Powell with the Iraq war scandal. They hung him out to dry.

Bachman is a Tea Bagger parasite. She'll never see the oval office. Ever. No Tea Bagger will ever become president. Ever. America is not THAT stupid.....I hope.