I'm registered as an independent but won't waste time voting. You get to choose your master... not whether you're free.
I am so frustrated with the GOP now. Currently I am registered Republican but I am so tired of this moderate-candidate bull crap. I just don't understand the GOP's logic. I told myself that I would never vote against somebody, but would only vote FOR somebody. I cannot with clear conscience support Romney. Like others have said, he is just Obama-light. We ran a "moderate" in the last election, and look where that got us.
I've always been under the impression that the Ron Paul supporters are a bunch of fruit cakes (although I've got to be honest, I've never really researched Ron Paul seriously). I'm now willing to take a second look at RP. I have heard a few disturbing things about him regarding foreign policies, his newsletters, and some other ties he might have. Are these true? Don't know...need to do the research. Once I give him the thorough once-over, and if he seems to be legit, I will fully support him.
I've always been under the impression that the Ron Paul supporters are a bunch of fruit cakes (although I've got to be honest, I've never really researched Ron Paul seriously). I'm now willing to take a second look at RP. I have heard a few disturbing things about him regarding foreign policies, his newsletters, and some other ties he might have. Are these true? Don't know...need to do the research. Once I give him the thorough once-over, and if he seems to be legit, I will fully support him.
Well I agree with you one the 10/20 year appointments, but I'm not willing to risk FOUR 80 year old Justices hanging in for another four years. The stakes are just too high in light of the dissenting opinions written on Heller and other cases. They've put their agenda front and center for all the world to see and should really be ousted for violating their oath. But I digress...
Been eligible to vote since 1986, and have never voted FOR a President, and I’ve voted in every election since I was 18. It’s that bad.
What's so disturbing about it? As RH stated, it's a huge reason why a good number of people support him, Republicans and Democrats alike. A good number of Democrats voted for him in the NH primary because they favor his blend of conservative economic policies and reserved foreign policy, and find themselves disenchanted with Obama and the Democrats.
Think back to the 2010 elections. The Republicans made waves not because the vast majority of the country became Republican in the last two years, but because they were sick of the powers that be.
And you don't think Robama will nominate the same as Obamney?
You might want to research Romney's judicial appointments when he was governor of Mass.
With Romney it's just a risk. With Obama it's a given.
Obama has proven he doesn't give a rat's ass about what the public wants. Romney might well nominate a communist/socialist but he gives the "appearance" that he's changing to the will of the people. He's getting hammered for "flip-floppin" every day after all. Besides Romney has a ways to go before he's the GOP's pick. These two primaries were no surprise and mean basically squat. The real ones start soon.
It has nothing to do with supporting Paul. It has to do with supporting sound fiscal policy, practical and sustainable foreign policy and support and defense of the Constitution, none of which the GOP currently does. It could be Newt Romney, but it isn't. Why? Because that's not how the GOP wants to do business. The reason the don't support RP is the same reason they don't support Dr. No. It would mean an end to their shenannigans, and they'll have none of that.
I primarily support Paul because of his his stance on the COTUS. EVERY other GOP candidate is an outright statist compared to him on this subject, with track records to prove it.
A strong secondary reason is his fiscal policy. He gets it FAR more than any other candidate in the past 25 years.
I support his ideas on foreign policy to a certain extent. I actually believe that our REAL allies would appreciate us stepping back from the cage matches we always seem to be engaged in. We could make their lives easier, which would solidify their support of us. It might not do a damned thing to dissuade the radicals and rogue nations of the world, but it would significantly improve our relations with more reasonable nations. We could once again play the part of world leader, rather than world bully. This in turn would reap economic benefits.
I could care less about his social policies. Whether marijuana is legalized or not is simply unimportant to me. I think the WOD is an abject failure. legalize the drugs or not, just stop wasting blood and dollars trying to control the uncontrollable. As for all the other social issues, they do not factor into good governance. Those should be left exclusively to the states and the people. Any candidate that talks about "defense of marriage", abortion, gays in the military, etc. is a complete loss. They are wasting everyone's time and energy on things that have nothing to do with good governance.
Our current federal government is an abject failure. It is simply unredeemable. Neither party is interested in fixing it, because that would diminish their own power. When someone is so loathed by their own party, that's what we call a clue. Do you really want to align your political opinions with the people who've done such a horrible job that they only have an 8% approval rating? Do you really want to be in lockstep with the media at this point? There's only one viable candidate to date that bucks that trend, Ron Paul. He's no messiah, but he's the only one in the boat to recognize that we're rowing over the falls, and has the balls to say so.
Lawl.
I'd disagree. I think Paul is naively lolbertarian with his economic views, and I'd normally never support anyone who is anti-choice, but his foreign policy alone means that if by some weird turn of events he ends up on the ballot...I'd show up and cast a meaningless vote for him.
The young generation grew up watching Clinton lob cruise missiles for reasons nobody could explain, Bush start decade long wars for reasons he couldn't articulate, and Obama carry on the tradition and leave his hope and change on the dresser. They're tired of it. Tired of being told the reason we are at risk is because we don't spend enough money and our presence in other countries is not large enough.
Ron Paul would not be a household name if not for his views on foreign policy. That is the sole reason he has any support to speak of whatsoever. If he had his same views on everything else, but aligned his foreign policy with mainstream Repubs and Dems...we would not even know who he was.
