Election Game Plan for Conservatives

[ScreamingEagle]

Many conservatives are wringing their hands on how to vote this election. We want to vote for somebody other than the RINO McPain that the GOP stuck us with….because we want to change things. But, on the other hand, we DON'T want to see the marxist socialist BO waltz into office….especially regarding those precious Supreme Court appointments.

So I came up with this idea. First take a look at the probability of which way the electoral votes for your state will go…a couple maps are linked below. This can help you decide how to throw your vote this disastrous election year. Make your choice based on how MOST effective your vote will be toward one of two goals…either voting third party to create future change or keeping Obama out of office…who says conservatives can't do both this year?

For example: Since I live in Washington, a strong Dem state, I know that my state's electoral votes will be going to Obama. Thus I have no reason to vote for McPain in order to defeat Obama….which I would do if my state was teetering between Obama and McCain. However, since it isn't, I can safely vote for a third party to help give them a boost toward the 5% of the popular vote needed for representation and funding in the next election.

Those who are living in strong GOP states can also vote for a third party candidate to help push for a third party alternative next election without the fear of putting Obama into office.

Where states are weak or barely or exactly tied, a vote for McCain would be smart and helpful in keeping Obama OUT of office and the Supreme Court filled with conservatives.

Election 2008: Presidential, Senate and House Races Updated Daily
2008 Electoral Map Based on the Intrade Prediction Market - 6/27/08

 

[midcan5]

The greatest threat of a McCain presidency is the selection of more ideologues to the supreme court and other courts. America was founded on laws that supported the freedom of the individual to privacy and control over their own lives. Bush has been selecting ideologues for seven years and you see the results in wire tapping, corporate corruption, torture, and the loss of habeas corpus. Should McCain select fascists similar to Scalia, individual freedom will be lost to religious fanaticism and corporate power.


A vote for McCain is a vote against the fundamental principle of America, the right of the individual to lead their life without the government interfering.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The greatest threat of a McCain presidency is the selection of more ideologues to the supreme court and other courts. America was founded on laws that supported the freedom of the individual to privacy and control over their own lives. Bush has been selecting ideologues for seven years and you see the results in wire tapping, corporate corruption, torture, and the loss of habeas corpus. Should McCain select fascists similar to Scalia, individual freedom will be lost to religious fanaticism and corporate power.


A vote for McCain is a vote against the fundamental principle of America, the right of the individual to lead their life without the government interfering.

The recent vote on the Second Amendment has made it quite CLEAR who the fascists of the Court are….Ginsberg, Stevens, Bryer, and Souter.

Liberals:
Stevens, 88
Ginsberg, 75
Breyer, 70
Souter, 69

Swing vote:
Kennedy, 72

Conservatives:
Scalia, 72
Thomas, 60
Alito, 58
Roberts, 53

There is likely to be at least one vacancy during the next term. The ACLU justice, Ginsberg, is 75 and has had cancer. Stevens is 88 years old.

I'd like to see them replaced with appointments by McCain….NOT Obama….as they could affect the balance of the Court for years to come…

 

[nomdeplume]

The greatest threat of a McCain presidency is the selection of more ideologues to the supreme court and other courts..[/b]

What a fucking moron. That would be GOOD. Well, not to a leftist piece of shit who supports stealing everyone's rights away while inventing new rights for pieces of shit like terrorists. The entire constitution is based in IDEOLOGY. we are the first country founded entirely on ideas. IT's the one thing that has made the USA great above all other things.

 

[nomdeplume]

The recent vote on the Second Amendment has made it quite CLEAR who the fascists of the Court are….Ginsberg, Stevens, Bryer, and Souter.
…

The exact same fuckers who voted for eminent domain, bsically meaning private industry can steal your land and home any time they want if they think they can make money off the process.

 

[midcan5]

I'm not sure the loss of freedom is ever a good thing but I see the propaganda machine has it blind followers.



A vote for McCain is a vote against the fundamental principle of America, the right of the individual to lead their life without the government interfering.

 

[Gunny]

Many conservatives are wringing their hands on how to vote this election. We want to vote for somebody other than the RINO McPain that the GOP stuck us with….because we want to change things. But, on the other hand, we DON'T want to see the marxist socialist BO waltz into office….especially regarding those precious Supreme Court appointments.

So I came up with this idea. First take a look at the probability of which way the electoral votes for your state will go…a couple maps are linked below. This can help you decide how to throw your vote this disastrous election year. Make your choice based on how MOST effective your vote will be toward one of two goals…either voting third party to create future change or keeping Obama out of office…who says conservatives can't do both this year?

For example: Since I live in Washington, a strong Dem state, I know that my state's electoral votes will be going to Obama. Thus I have no reason to vote for McPain in order to defeat Obama….which I would do if my state was teetering between Obama and McCain. However, since it isn't, I can safely vote for a third party to help give them a boost toward the 5% of the popular vote needed for representation and funding in the next election.

Those who are living in strong GOP states can also vote for a third party candidate to help push for a third party alternative next election without the fear of putting Obama into office.

Where states are weak or barely or exactly tied, a vote for McCain would be smart and helpful in keeping Obama OUT of office and the Supreme Court filled with conservatives.

Election 2008: Presidential, Senate and House Races Updated Daily
2008 Electoral Map Based on the Intrade Prediction Market - 6/27/08

Get a clue. The GOP has conceded this election. They don't want McGrampa as President but they aren't too worried he will win. You've been sold out for political expediency. Four years of Obama will make just about anything the GOP throws out in 2012 look like a Godsend and the political strategists know it.

Just to clarify, that IS just my opinion based on what I'm seeing.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Get a clue. The GOP has conceded this election. They don't want McGrampa as President but they aren't too worried he will win. You've been sold out for political expediency. Four years of Obama will make just about anything the GOP throws out in 2012 look like a Godsend and the political strategists know it.

Just to clarify, that IS just my opinion based on what I'm seeing.

So you think we should just give up... and dish up the election to Obama on a silver platter?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The exact same fuckers who voted for eminent domain, bsically meaning private industry can steal your land and home any time they want if they think they can make money off the process.

Exactly....hence my sig line with Scalia's telling question...those same 4 fuckers are also the ones who recently voted no death penalty for heinous child rapists and also usurped our military to allow foreign enemies the privilege of using our court system...why don't they just send out engraved invitations to the scum of the earth to come and walk all over us?

 

[editec]

Election Game Plan for Conservatives

Round up the usual suspects and lie like hell?

 

[AllieBaba]

Once again, the dems prove they are unable to stop pointing out their own crimes via accusing others of the same crimes....

 

[Larkinn]

What a fucking moron. That would be GOOD. Well, not to a leftist piece of shit who supports stealing everyone's rights away while inventing new rights for pieces of shit like terrorists. The entire constitution is based in IDEOLOGY. we are the first country founded entirely on ideas. IT's the one thing that has made the USA great above all other things.

So hes both stealing peoples rights away and giving them too many rights at the same time.

Next you'll go the "Hes a radical Muslim who belongs to a radical Christian Church" line as well.

 

[Larkinn]

The exact same fuckers who voted for eminent domain, bsically meaning private industry can steal your land and home any time they want if they think they can make money off the process.

No, actually thats not what Eminent Domain is. Unless you think the government counts as "private industry". And when was the last time something got "stolen" from you...that the thief then left you money for?

 

[nomdeplume]

No, actually thats not what Eminent Domain is. Unless you think the government counts as "private industry". And when was the last time something got "stolen" from you...that the thief then left you money for?

The government already had the right to do that, for highways and such. That is not what eminent domain laid down. One of the worst decision in supreme court history and you don't even fucking get it. Ridiculous. Don't even talk about the SCOTUS or the constitution again. I get time stolen from me all the time dealing with idiots like you.

 

[Larkinn]

The government already had the right to do that, for highways and such. That is not what eminent domain laid down. One of the worst decision in supreme court history and you don't even fucking get it. Ridiculous. Don't even talk about the SCOTUS or the constitution again. I get time stolen from me all the time dealing with idiots like you.

Oh, do tell me what "eminent domain" laid down.

Further please explain why it was one of the "worst decisions in supreme court history". I'd be especially interested to know why it was worse than Plessy, Korematsu, or Dred Scott.

 

[Steerpike]

The greatest threat of a McCain presidency is the selection of more ideologues to the supreme court and other courts. America was founded on laws that supported the freedom of the individual to privacy and control over their own lives. Bush has been selecting ideologues for seven years and you see the results in wire tapping, corporate corruption, torture, and the loss of habeas corpus. Should McCain select fascists similar to Scalia, individual freedom will be lost to religious fanaticism and corporate power.
[/b]

Ginsberg is one of the biggest ideologues on the Court. Robert is one of the better ones in my view, so the broad brush you are painting with doesn't hold true. Scalia on the other hand lets ideology come into play.

But to some extent, ideology ends up being what it is all about, because there are differing legal theories of jurisprudence and that is going to be tied to ideology.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Oh, do tell me what "eminent domain" laid down.

Further please explain why it was one of the "worst decisions in supreme court history". I'd be especially interested to know why it was worse than Plessy, Korematsu, or Dred Scott.

You're a damn liberal fool... blindly sucking up a damn liberal-biased legal education from our broken liberal educational system....one of the basic rights in our democracy is the individual right to own and keep private property. This was very important from the start of our country...check out the Fifth Amendment. This liberal ruling on Kelo v. London was an abomination of justice because it basically redefined and opened up the meaning of "public use" so that a semi-truck could drive through it....so that now your individual private property rights are up for grabs by any rich developer clever enough to bribe the local city council in order to take your property for "economic improvement".

 

[Larkinn]

You're a damn liberal fool... blindly sucking up a damn liberal-biased legal education from our broken liberal educational system....one of the basic rights in our democracy is the individual right to own and keep private property. This was very important from the start of our country...check out the Fifth Amendment.

Really, the fifth amendment says you can own and keep private property? Please explain to me where it says that. It doesn't give you a right to private property, it says if the gov takes away your property, they have to compensate you.

This liberal ruling on Kelo v. London was an abomination of justice because it basically redefined and opened up the meaning of "public use" so that a semi-truck could drive through it....so that now your individual private property rights are up for grabs by any rich developer clever enough to bribe the local city council in order to take your property for "economic improvement".

Which has just caused a national epidemic of new eminent domain cases, right?

By the way, if you could learn to read, you'd notice I never voiced support for Kelo.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Really, the fifth amendment says you can own and keep private property? Please explain to me where it says that. It doesn't give you a right to private property, it says if the gov takes away your property, they have to compensate you.

Like I said… the term "public use" has been re-defined by the liberal judicial activists….

Which has just caused a national epidemic of new eminent domain cases, right?

Yes, I believe the number of cases to take away private homes and churches and private businesses in order to benefit private commercial developments virtually doubled after the ruling.... even though some states passed additional laws to protect eminent domain abuse.

By the way, if you could learn to read, you'd notice I never voiced support for Kelo.

That doesn't mean you disagree with the liberal ruling either.....I'd be surprised if you did...

 

[Larkinn]

Like I said… the term "public use" has been re-defined by the liberal judicial activists….

Who do you think defined public use in the first place, genius?

Yes, I believe the number of cases to take away private homes and churches and private businesses in order to benefit private commercial developments virtually doubled after the ruling.... even though some states passed additional laws to protect eminent domain abuse.

Link?

That doesn't mean you disagree with the liberal ruling either.....I'd be surprised if you did...

Liberal ruling? Because liberals are oh so fond of corporations getting things at the cost of the poor/middle class, right?