It's Official - I hate the GOP

[MaddSkillz]

I will not vote for anyone but Ron Paul. Adjusting my vote for what I believe to be a massive ignorant populace is the equivalent of throwing in the towel and I'm just not going to give up and let dumb people "convert" me. No way in a non-existent hell.

 

[kd5rjz]

I will not vote for anyone but Ron Paul. Adjusting my vote for what I believe to be a massive ignorant populace is the equivalent of throwing in the towel and I'm just not going to give up and let dumb people "convert" me. No way in a non-existent hell.

+++1.

 

[bilboben]

I will not vote for anyone but Ron Paul. Adjusting my vote for what I believe to be a massive ignorant populace is the equivalent of throwing in the towel and I'm just not going to give up and let dumb people "convert" me. No way in a non-existent hell.

I am more okay with this, not voting in protest is better than voting for the other worser of two evils just to get back at the lessor of two evils. We cannot let Obama have the chance to put more seats on the SC. I will have done my duty and voted for Ron Paul in the primarys if he is still on the ticket then, but in the general election, it will be whomever is runining against Obama.

 

[HMFIC]

But that’s just it: it’s always dump your convictions to support the “best of the worst”, or whatever droppings the rest of the party (or more likely, corporate power) has been snookered into putting up for a nominee. Nothing changes when people just keep running with the crowd, because anything else is “a vote for the other guy”.

I hear you, but you don't have to drop your convictions in order to make a best choice from the options available.

Keep fighting for your convictions, press the cantidate(s) of choice to adopt your way of thinking on key items. Work hard at it if you believe in it and you can effect change.

Ron Paul isn't out of it yet, and those who wish to support him STILL have their chance. I just think it's silly to threaten that if he doesn't get get the nomination, then Obama is the choice.

 

[Glocktogo]

Every now and then, someone in each party calls for opening their primary to independents to influence what candidate wins their primary. Even so, it should be (and rightfully is) left up to the party to decide who can vote in their primaries.

Then again, the primaries in Oklahoma are (to my knowledge) paid for by the State of Oklahoma - if Democrat or Republican.

If primary elections are paid for with state funds, then independent voters should at a minimum be allowed to select which primary they'd like to vote in. Barring that, ballot access restrictions for the general election should be lifted. This is a republic, not a dictatorship.

 

[Glocktogo]

I can understand and appreciate those who feel strongly about supporting Ron Paul. However... to suggest that scuttling the country with four more years of Obama, his policies, appointments and administration just to "teach the GOP a lesson" if Paul doesn't get the nomination is disturbing.

If you're an Independant, why aren't you fighting the same way over the Democratic nomination? Why not press for a moderate cantidate in that party and threaten to vote for the GOP if they won't supply you one? Why just accept Obama as the shoe-in incumbant?

Listen... I'd love to always get my way 100% too, but I don't and never will. That's life. That doesn't mean I can't accept reality and choose the best option available if it's not my guy. I'll still fight and work for what I believe in, but at the end of the day, I have to make a sound decision and live to fight another day.

I hear you, but you don't have to drop your convictions in order to make a best choice from the options available.

Keep fighting for your convictions, press the cantidate(s) of choice to adopt your way of thinking on key items. Work hard at it if you believe in it and you can effect change.

Ron Paul isn't out of it yet, and those who wish to support him STILL have their chance. I just think it's silly to threaten that if he doesn't get get the nomination, then Obama is the choice.

It's not a threat, it's real. The GOP has had 25 years to reform and now they're getting substantial pushback from their own party members. You have the Tea Party, which stands outside the GOP no matter how badly they want to pretend on one hand that they're part and parcel of the GOP and dismiss them as kooky with the other. You have a noticeable number of GOP defectors to the Libertarian party or simply stand alone independents because the GOP has abandoned it's own principles. Your assessment that that "teaching the GOP a lesson" is disturbing will fall on deaf ears. The GOP taught us a lesson already. That lesson is "shut up and vote for us and we'll fix things when we win". Then they never do and pretend the win was a mandate to continue torpedoing the country.

I'd say that the GOPbots willingness to accept another 4 years of GOP failure in exchange for defeating Obama is short sighted and naive. We're not looking at the next 4 years, we're looking at the next 40 years. If we refuse to teach the GOP the error of their ways now, there will be no GOP in 40 years.

I am the GOP and it's run amok for too long. It's time for a vist to the woodshed.

 

[HMFIC]

It's not a threat, it's real. The GOP has had 25 years to reform and now they're getting substantial pushback from their own party members. You have the Tea Party, which stands outside the GOP no matter how badly they want to pretend on one hand that they're part and parcel of the GOP and dismiss them as kooky with the other. You have a noticeable number of GOP defectors to the Libertarian party or simply stand alone independents because the GOP has abandoned it's own principles. Your assessment that that "teaching the GOP a lesson" is disturbing will fall on deaf ears. The GOP taught us a lesson already. That lesson is "shut up and vote for us and we'll fix things when we win". Then they never do and pretend the win was a mandate to continue torpedoing the country.

I'd say that the GOPbots willingness to accept another 4 years of GOP failure in exchange for defeating Obama is short sighted and naive. We're not looking at the next 4 years, we're looking at the next 40 years. If we refuse to teach the GOP the error of their ways now, there will be no GOP in 40 years.

I am the GOP and it's run amok for too long. It's time for a vist to the woodshed.

You'll have better luck trying to instigate change from within the GOP than turning Obama into anything close to what you desire.

Good luck on strapping the GOP to the whipping post. Seems that a lot of people tried that last go around with McCain and look where it got us.

Let me know how it works out for you...

 

[bilboben]

It's not a threat, it's real. The GOP has had 25 years to reform and now they're getting substantial pushback from their own party members. You have the Tea Party, which stands outside the GOP no matter how badly they want to pretend on one hand that they're part and parcel of the GOP and dismiss them as kooky with the other. You have a noticeable number of GOP defectors to the Libertarian party or simply stand alone independents because the GOP has abandoned it's own principles. Your assessment that that "teaching the GOP a lesson" is disturbing will fall on deaf ears. The GOP taught us a lesson already. That lesson is "shut up and vote for us and we'll fix things when we win". Then they never do and pretend the win was a mandate to continue torpedoing the country.


I'd say that the GOPbots willingness to accept another 4 years of GOP failure in exchange for defeating Obama is short sighted and naive. We're not looking at the next 4 years, we're looking at the next 40 years. If we refuse to teach the GOP the error of their ways now, there will be no GOP in 40 years.

I am the GOP and it's run amok for too long. It's time for a vist to the woodshed.

I am looking at the next 40 years, 40 years of *&*& with liberals in charge of the SC. It does not look appealling and I cannot undue that with elections and voting. Those are lifetime appointments and these new kooks like legislate from the bench.

 

[Glocktogo]

I am looking at the next 40 years, 40 years of *&*& with liberals in charge of the SC. It does not look appealling and I cannot undue that with elections and voting. Those are lifetime appointments and these new kooks like legislate from the bench.

Then you should definitely hold out for the correct candidate. Romney is as likely to nominate a soft on the Constitution candidate as Obama. The difference being a walk on during confirmation, vs. a protracted battle where Obama might have to withdraw his candidate.

Ron Paul WILL NOT nominate a statist candidate. He would nominate a strict constitutionalist.

Like it or not, Romney on the GOP ticket WILL split the party and that's a win for Obama. Want Obama defeated? Then get on the bus now, because it's already almost too late.

 

[Hobbes]

Then you should definitely hold out for the correct candidate. Romney is as likely to nominate a soft on the Constitution candidate as Obama. The difference being a walk on during confirmation, vs. a protracted battle where Obama might have to withdraw his candidate.

Ron Paul WILL NOT nominate a statist candidate. He would nominate a strict constitutionalist.

Like it or not, Romney on the GOP ticket WILL split the party and that's a win for Obama. Want Obama defeated? Then get on the bus now, because it's already almost too late.

The other aspect of this is Romney will have 8 more long years to appoint judges and O would only have 4 years.

I'm sure everyone is looking forward to 8 long years of Romney in the WH. 8 State of the Union speeches, the last being January 2021