Ron Paul supporters

[TrickyNicky]

That's what the primary election was for was it not?

That's exactly what the primary elections are for. My "issue" is I've been hearing all about the reasons RP can't win going back to at least December of last year. Number one with a bullet has been that since he won't win why waste a vote primary or presidential.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to vote, far from it and I sure as hell aren't any kind of 'bot but it does make me scratch my head at the displeasure people have over "their only two choices" when there is another option on the table viable or not.

Also have to laugh a bit at folks convinced that Obama will declare himself supreme dictator and do away with the electoral process altogether if he wins the next one. Reminds me of what alot of people said about Dubbya back in 04.

It seems as though by todays logic we would have been better off swearing loyalty to Luis XVI back in 1776 since he might have been better than old GeorgeIII.

[sigmtnman]

No one admits to voting for him and lots of folks think he was the worst choice. So, I'm left to wonder, who did vote for Romney in the primary?

Edited July 22, 2012 by sigmtnman

[TMF]

No one admits to voting for him and lots of folks think he was the worst choice. So, I'm left to wonder, who did vote for Romney in the primary?

Not me.

[Guest Shep Stoner308]

To claim that you have to give Bush Sr. most all of Perot's votes, but exit polls show close to an even siphon from both candidates, with about 25% of Perot voters saying they wouldn't have voted at all had he not been on the ballot.

I remembered that from long ago, but don't remember this and couldn't seem to find it right off -- if all the Perot votes were given to Bush, he'd have won the popular vote, but would that have also swung the electoral to him?

- OS

I remember that Perot got about 21 million votes, it was my understanding that the margins were such that Bush would have won if he had not gotten back in AFTER quitting the first time and then getting back in, I may be incorrect on this as I am going from memory and have not researched it at all at this point.

[Oh Shoot]

... So, I'm left to wonder, who did vote for Romney in the primary?

I didn't vote, left it for you guys to decide. And y'all chose Mitt, so gotta go with him myself now.

- OS

[kieefer]

That's exactly what the primary elections are for. My "issue" is I've been hearing all about the reasons RP can't win going back to at least December of last year. Number one with a bullet has been that since he won't win why waste a vote primary or presidential.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to vote, far from it and I sure as hell aren't any kind of 'bot but it does make me scratch my head at the displeasure people have over "their only two choices" when there is another option on the table viable or not.

Also have to laugh a bit at folks convinced that Obama will declare himself supreme dictator and do away with the electoral process altogether if he wins the next one. Reminds me of what alot of people said about Dubbya back in 04.

It seems as though by todays logic we would have been better off swearing loyalty to Luis XVI back in 1776 since he might have been better than old GeorgeIII.

That's my point.

The people who voted for Romney was the vast majority who do not strongly think of conservatism of libertarian as a direction for our government.

There's also simply too many voters who are not in tune with the process. They see things going down the crapper and will vote for the best looking, the smoothest talking candidate that they think will do the hopey-changey thing again.

.

Edited July 22, 2012 by kieefer

[kieefer]

I didn't vote, left it for you guys to decide. And y'all chose Mitt, so gotta go with him myself now.

- OS

So you're the one.

[sigmtnman]

Then the vast majority should have no trouble with Obama, since Romney was cut from the same cloth.

This next statement is sure to piss off plenty of folks... The choice between a Muslim and a non Christian, is not a choice I will participate in.

[kieefer]

I know I won't.

[TMF]

This next statement is sure to piss off plenty of folks... The choice between a Muslim and a non Christian, is not a choice I will participate in.

When I'm being lied to and misled it doesn't really matter what religion they are. Someone who congregates doesn't mean they automatically kneel at the cross, so to speak.

[kieefer]

Sounded kinda racist to me.

[Oh Shoot]

....This next statement is sure to piss off plenty of folks... The choice between a Muslim and a non Christian, is not a choice I will participate in.

I just find it ironic. As an agnostic, I have to choose some religious nut every election.

I must admit though, that one of the few things more bizarre to me than plain ole Christianity is the further lunatic layer that Mormonism tacks onto it.

- OS

Edited July 22, 2012 by OhShoot

[sigmtnman]

I know I won't.

Mormons do not believe in the Trinity. So if you vote for Romney, you will.

[sigmtnman]

When I'm being lied to and misled it doesn't really matter what religion they are. Someone who congregates doesn't mean they automatically kneel at the cross, so to speak.

Agreed. "Going to church doesn't make you a Christian, anymore than standing in a garage makes you a car"

[sigmtnman]

I just find it ironic. As an agnostic, I have to choose some religious nut every election.

I must admit though, that one of the few things more bizarre to me than plain ole Christianity is the further lunatic layer that Mormonism tacks onto it.

- OS

As an agnostic, you don't have to choose some religious nut. You choose to participate in choosing a religious nut. I would not support a religious nut either.

I reckon it depends on how you define nut. Personally, I would not support a religious person who wanted to override a person's free will, which in my mind is a religious nut. The Lord gave us free will for a reason.

Are you saying that being religious makes you a nut? I don't believe agnostics are nuts, just that they have chosen to not have faith. While I don't choose that path, it's not for me to judge you.

[sigmtnman]

I reckon I could have phrased that as "The choice between two non Christians..."

Also, don't take that as me saying Christianity should be the only religion people can practice. I believe in free will and while I may not agree, I certainly would not wish to take it away from a person.

[TMF]

Agreed. "Going to church doesn't make you a Christian, anymore than standing in a garage makes you a car"

Ha, that is a good one. I'll have to remember that. I have a hard time believing that my politicians believe in the religion they practice. I'm sure there are some, but I think that's the exception to the rule. The nature of politicians is to sell anything to make themselves more electable, and they know that Americans won't vote for a non-Christian leader. That makes me suspicious of them all. But then again, a person's religion won't make me vote/not vote for them. I've met good and bad religious people just like I've met good and bad athiests. I even met a Buddhist once that was a total a-hole.

[sigmtnman]

Ha, that is a good one. I'll have to remember that. I have a hard time believing that my politicians believe in the religion they practice. I'm sure there are some, but I think that's the exception to the rule. The nature of politicians is to sell anything to make themselves more electable, and they know that Americans won't vote for a non-Christian leader. That makes me suspicious of them all. But then again, a person's religion won't make me vote/not vote for them. I've met good and bad religious people just like I've met good and bad athiests. I even met a Buddhist once that was a total a-hole.

You are absolutely correct in that there are good and bad in every group. Also agree that most of our politicians do not practice what they say they believe. Religion should be a matter of free will and not coercion just as voting.

[Oh Shoot]

As an agnostic, you don't have to choose some religious nut. You choose to participate in choosing a religious nut. I would not support a religious nut either.

I reckon it depends on how you define nut. Personally, I would not support a religious person who wanted to override a person's free will, which in my mind is a religious nut. The Lord gave us free will for a reason.

Are you saying that being religious makes you a nut? I don't believe agnostics are nuts, just that they have chosen to not have faith. While I don't choose that path, it's not for me to judge you.

That's a lot of philosophy and/or opinion to discuss, and would take this way off topic.

To answer your one actual question, yes. But of course, "nut" is a relatively benign term; all we paltry homo sapiens are of that ilk in one or more ways.

- OS

[Oh Shoot]

... I have a hard time believing that my politicians believe in the religion they practice. I'm sure there are some, but I think that's the exception to the rule. The nature of politicians is to sell anything to make themselves more electable, and they know that Americans won't vote for a non-Christian leader. That makes me suspicious of them all. ...

That's actually a minor source of solace for me. It somewhat pisses me off that Obama (and many others) claim to be Christian but are actually more like me -- but I understand why. But it really does rather frighten me that Romney seems to actually believe that stuff.

Says much regarding just how scarey I see BHO in other ways, that I'm still voting for Mitt.

- OS

Edited July 22, 2012 by OhShoot

[sigmtnman]

That's a lot of philosophy and/or opinion to discuss, and would take this way off topic.

To answer your one actual question, yes. But of course, "nut" is a relatively benign term; all we paltry homo sapiens are of that ilk in one or more ways.

- OS

As though any topics stay "on".

[kieefer]

Mormons do not believe in the Trinity. So if you vote for Romney, you will.

You're making a judgement there aren't you? You have no idea how I feel about religions or what I believe or even if that affects my vote.

Looks to me like you are discriminating against Romney because he is a Mormon, or rather he claims to be. Yet BHO appears closer to the Muslim religion than any previous President.

So, you either hate Romney and his religion but you don't have a problem with BHO with his muslim ties. Plus you say they are the same......?

I'm beginning to think you just enjoy the argument.

I'm going back to my garage, I feel like a Porsche when I'm in there but all I have is a Ford.

[Guest bkelm18]

You're making a judgement there aren't you? You have no idea how I feel about religions or what I believe or even if that affects my vote.

Looks to me like you are discriminating against Romney because he is a Mormon, or rather he claims to be. Yet BHO appears closer to the Muslim religion than any previous President.

So, you either hate Romney and his religion but you don't have a problem with BHO with his muslim ties. Plus you say they are the same......?

I'm beginning to think you just enjoy the argument.

I'm going back to my garage, I feel like a Porsche when I'm in there but all I have is a Ford.

Don't worry, all the brainwashed Paulbots will quiet down after November when Paul loses utterly and completely. Or they'll just whine for 4 years about how more people shoulda voted for Paul. So it'll be just like the usual.

[sigmtnman]

You're making a judgement there aren't you? You have no idea how I feel about religions or what I believe or even if that affects my vote.

Looks to me like you are discriminating against Romney because he is a Mormon, or rather he claims to be. Yet BHO appears closer to the Muslim religion than any previous President.

So, you either hate Romney and his religion but you don't have a problem with BHO with his muslim ties. Plus you say they are the same......?

I'm beginning to think you just enjoy the argument.

I'm going back to my garage, I feel like a Porsche when I'm in there but all I have is a Ford.

Well my apologies if I misunderstood your post directly after mine.

I know I won't.

I don't hate anyone. But that does not mean I have to agree to everything, everyone or anyone for that matter.

I'm not sure how you define Christianity, but the Trinity is a basic tenet.

http://www.nytimes.c...stian.html?_r=1

Edited July 23, 2012 by sigmtnman

[Oh Shoot]

... in Orthodox Christianity the Trinity is a basic tenant.

Is the rent the same in Catholic, Anglican, and Protestant sects?

- OS