Take a watch boys at the only Republican worth a damn enough to vote for.
Take a watch boys at the only Republican worth a damn enough to vote for.
I think his dad ruined any chances he might have had.
OleVet Posse Instigator
I'd rather have his dad, but Rand is a serviceable substitute. Also, he's far far more popular with the rank-and-file of the party than his dad was. The filibuster went a long way toward that.Originally Posted by Turd_Ferguson
Anyone but Jeb. His brother screwed things up enough to allow the despot we have today to ascend into the highest office. So tired of the Bush bunch I could scream. Even today each one of them masquerades as conservatives. Conservatives don't increase the national debt by 5 Trillion or expand the already morbid obese Federal Government.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
No. Not anyone but Jeb. Jeb and the rest of the GOP field, aside from Paul and Cruz, are not demonstrably different from one another. I will vote for Paul and only Paul in the primary. I would likely vote for Cruz in the general if he ended up as the nominee. However, there isn't a single other Republican I would even consider voting for at this point -- the rest can go to hell. I haven't voted for a Republican for President since 2004, and there's no way I'd do any different in 2016.
So Scott Walker against Hillary and you won't vote? We can't change the face of DC overnight. No perfect candidate out there, never has been, but Republicans are really bad about staying at home if the "perfect" candidate is not running, and leftists like BHO get elected and re-elected. A Scott Walker would be world's better than what we've had the last 6 years. So would Cruz, so would several others. Hell they would all be better than BHO or Hillary.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
I will not vote for Jeb or Christie. I will vote for Rand, Cruz, and Scott. I am open to Rubio if he can atone for his stupid immigration faux paux. I actually think he let idiots like Lindsey Graham,McCain and McConnel talk him into being the face of the GOP immigration reform movement. It is a decision he will regret for the rest of his political career.
Beware the man who would rule you for your own good. He will never cease. He will regulate every aspect of your life, destroy your liberty and enslave you, and sleep well convinced that he has made the world a better place.
Scott Walker made a lot of campaign promised this past election, mainly pandering to the swing voters.
Once re-elected he has gone back on those promises (Personhood, cutting State school budgets).
People are pizzed at his broken promises.
If an election were held tomorrow in Wisconsin, Walker would lose.
He's just a shill for the Koch Brothers.
5-0
BOY HOWDY !!!!
How does Rand Paul stand on Foreign policy and strong National Defense ?
Does he believe we're the World's Policeman ?
5-0
BOY HOWDY !!!!
Oh, here we go, the 'perfect candidate' argument that I've argued against for years around here. No. I am not waiting around for the 'perfect candidate.' Rand is by no means a 'perfect candidate.' What I expect is that, on balance, they expand individual/civil liberties and reduce the size and scope of government. Rand definitely fits that definition. Cruz does to a lesser extent. Walker is iffy -- if you look at his career he's been a little on the wishy-washy side, and he fails the foreign policy test.
And, while we are on the subject of tests, I will not oppose a candidate simply because I don't agree with them 100% of the time; however, there are a handful of 'litmus' test issues. Let me give you an example: Voting against the Amash amendment is an automatic disqualifier as is supporting SOPA. Supporting the 2011 NDAA is another one.
No, not just 'anyone' is better than Obama and Hillary. Everyone not named Paul or Cruz is as bad or, in a couple of notable cases, worse than at least Hillary. Whether a candidate is marginally better or worse than a Democrat shouldn't be anyone's standard. As for 'changing DC overnight' -- you are never going to change DC so long as you keep voting for the same ****ty *** Republicans. Rewarding bad behavior never works. The sort of Republicans that you think are all 'better than Obama and Hillary' are not only the reason we ended up with an Obama but a major contributing factor to the reason Washington is the way that it is. If you want change you need to vote for a radical departure from the standard **** sandwich.
Hypothetical. Clinton v. Bush. You are saying Hillary would be a better choice (not as bad) than Bush?
Essentially, that would be a wash. It's really hard to say one would be worse than the other one; however, I might give a slight edge to Hillary because I think her foreign policy would be more pragmatic than the neocon fantasy of Bush Inc.
Wouldn't it almost always be better to vote the Republican candidate, even a bad one, if for no other reason than Supreme Court nominees. Though it's no sure thing with a Republican appointment, Democratic appointments will be universally bad.
No. I stopped expecting anything out of 'conservative' justices a long time ago. The Supreme Court needs, and Constitutional equilibrium demands, that the states nullify and/or refuse to comply with unconstitutional Federal law. Who sits on the court is irrelevant -- they are still Federal appointees from one branch, confirmed by another branch, making up a third branch....they have a vested interest in growing and protecting Federal power.
While I agree with you philosophically, what you are suggesting is just wishful thinking. It won't happen.
The Revolution was wishful thinking before it wasn't. So long as people don't demand it, nothing is going to change.
Duh!
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Sicem has said in the past that he didn't condemn slick Willy Clinton, so I would guess he would prefer Sir Hillry over Bush. Of course, voting 3rd party is certainly not making a logical effort to keep the democrats from continuing to transform the country.
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Then you better be willing to take up arms and prepare to die. Personally I prefer the tact of trying to stack the Court for a starter.
As they say, it ain't rocket science.
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Posting Permissions
