What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Thanks Republicans for wasting your Vote and electing Obama!!!

Avorysuds

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
13,834
Reaction score
1,658
Points
245
Location
Eugene Oregon
Thanks Neocons for re-electing Obama when you pushed yet another Progressive to the front of the pack during the Republican Primaries. You then wasted your vote in the GE and re-elected Obama.

The Republican party fought at great lengths to shrink itself by disenfranchising Ron Paul supporters and Libertarians, women and all minorities, people that believe in evolution and want a balanced budget.

You Neocons lost against a President with near 8% UE who is in so many wars most people don’t bother to count.

This year it seems about 120,000,000 million people voted, in 2008 it was 131,000,000 million. This means You lost against a President who is falling in popularity at a tremendous rate, like UE under Obama, his supporters couldn’t even keep up with population growth.

So where does the Republican party go from here? Do you keep electing Progressives whose past policies are big Government all the way around the block, people that want nuclear war with anyone that gets pissed when we bomb their country for 10+ years or arm their enemies? Do you keep supporting people that want to enter a cold war with Cuba… people that talk about God, their faith and then how important it is to enter wars and kill tens of thousands of civilians?

Now I’m not saying there is a difference between Republican and Democrats policies when it comes to wars, a balanced budget and upholding the constitution, there isn’t. But your party and the Democratic party are shrinking, so what are you going to do? I mean how much further left can you go than footing a candidate that supported near every single policy Obama had at some point?

I left the Republican party, millions have and millions more will be… Is this where you tell me and other to get fucked, then sit back and watch your party bleed to death, or do you think it’s time to elect people that have a record to run off over God, War, hating gays, hating abortion and how much they hate Dimacrats! Because currently the Republican platform by actual policy is that of massive Government (Medicare part D, Romneycare and so on) and positions on issues that have no role in the Federal Government, like gay marriage and how awesome God is.
 

bobcollum

Rookie
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
9,428
Reaction score
1,038
Points
0
Location
where I'm located
It's true, Ron Paul was the only chance Republicans had of taking the WH, but neo-con principles just wouldn't let it happen.
 

dblack

Diamond Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
41,140
Reaction score
6,951
Points
1,830
While I appreciate the spirit of your post, I'd hardly say the Neo-cons 'lost' this election. They won over a year ago.
 

dblack

Diamond Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
41,140
Reaction score
6,951
Points
1,830
It's true, Ron Paul was the only chance Republicans had of taking the WH, but neo-con principles just wouldn't let it happen.

Hmmm ... can't quite go that far. I think the mainstream media would have had an unmitigated feeding frenzy on Paul. The Republicans would have lost even more dramatically with him at the helm.

As others have pointed out there - we won't get libertarian government until we have libetarian voters. And for now we mostly don't. It's gratifying to see more and more people seeing the light, but we're a long way from critical mass.
 

Oddball

Unobtanium Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
75,784
Reaction score
47,142
Points
2,615
Location
Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
It's true, Ron Paul was the only chance Republicans had of taking the WH, but neo-con principles just wouldn't let it happen.

Hmmm ... can't quite go that far. I think the mainstream media would have had an unmitigated feeding frenzy on Paul. The Republicans would have lost even more dramatically with him at the helm.

As others have pointed out there - we won't get libertarian government until we have libetarian voters. And for now we mostly don't. It's gratifying to see more and more people seeing the light, but we're a long way from critical mass.

Since nearly half of the electorate doesn't even show up, you can't say that with any certainty.

It only took an additional 15% turnout in Minnesota to get Jesse Ventura elected....That's not to say that he's a big libertarian, just that you don't need that big of an added number of the sideliners to win the day if your messaging is right.
 

bobcollum

Rookie
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
9,428
Reaction score
1,038
Points
0
Location
where I'm located
It's true, Ron Paul was the only chance Republicans had of taking the WH, but neo-con principles just wouldn't let it happen.

Hmmm ... can't quite go that far. I think the mainstream media would have had an unmitigated feeding frenzy on Paul. The Republicans would have lost even more dramatically with him at the helm.

As others have pointed out there - we won't get libertarian government until we have libetarian voters. And for now we mostly don't. It's gratifying to see more and more people seeing the light, but we're a long way from critical mass.

As I see it, had Paul been the nominee he would have easily received all the votes Romney secured last night, if anything to vote against, and to try to remove Obama from power.

Then you take into account the independents, along with the non-democrat liberals and youngsters that find Paul's anti-war and anti drug laws appealing, and you have someone that's getting more votes than Romney.

He's certainly more likable than the guy they had up there.
 

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,481
Points
1,830
If Ron Paul had won the nomination, I'm afraid that it would mark the first time I did not vote in a presidential election. The choice would have been between a man that hates America and a lunatic.
 

The Rabbi

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
67,733
Reaction score
7,920
Points
1,840
Location
Nashville
Ron Paul lost almost every race he ever ran. He polls poorly among traditional conservatives, to say nothing of liberals, who think he's crazy.
The idea that Paul would have won the general election is so absurd it wouldn't even fly as an article in The Onion.
 

bobcollum

Rookie
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
9,428
Reaction score
1,038
Points
0
Location
where I'm located
If Ron Paul had won the nomination, I'm afraid that it would mark the first time I did not vote in a presidential election. The choice would have been between a man that hates America and a lunatic.

You're a lunatic.

That's why your party is dying.
 
OP
Avorysuds

Avorysuds

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
13,834
Reaction score
1,658
Points
245
Location
Eugene Oregon
It's true, Ron Paul was the only chance Republicans had of taking the WH, but neo-con principles just wouldn't let it happen.

Ron Paul is a horrible candidate. Paul has the record and the ideas but he himself is a very hard sell. Paul is old, lacks a strong voice and so on... My intension was not to claim the GOP needed to elect Paul but rather look at the future and ask themselves, do you keep going to the left in hopes that you win over progressives, or do you take a chance and put up a conservative with a record?

Mitt is about the most Progressive candidate alive today under the Republican or Democrat banner. There is a reason the slogan was “Anyone But Obama!!” Because the "conservative" standard was at it’s lowest.
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
Neo cons and tea party people cant win elections.

that is what this election showed
 

bobcollum

Rookie
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
9,428
Reaction score
1,038
Points
0
Location
where I'm located
Ron Paul lost almost every race he ever ran. He polls poorly among traditional conservatives, to say nothing of liberals, who think he's crazy.
The idea that Paul would have won the general election is so absurd it wouldn't even fly as an article in The Onion.

Hey look everyone, the guy that wanted Rick Perry is telling us who would've been a better choice.

:lol:
 
OP
Avorysuds

Avorysuds

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
13,834
Reaction score
1,658
Points
245
Location
Eugene Oregon
Ahhh. The 1%ers are here to tell us they have the candidates America wants and need.


LOL

Did I do that? But thanks for 4 more years of Obama you chit bag =D On that topic, that 1% is not allowed in debates, that 1% spends less than 1% the money as Republicans alone... As people realize you Republicans can't win a GE you too will slowly raise less and less money compared to Democrats, you too will find yourselves with less help from the Media. But then again, at this rate Hillary or Gore might run as a Republican soon, and you just might vote for them.
 
Last edited:

bobcollum

Rookie
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
9,428
Reaction score
1,038
Points
0
Location
where I'm located
It's true, Ron Paul was the only chance Republicans had of taking the WH, but neo-con principles just wouldn't let it happen.

Ron Paul is a horrible candidate. Paul has the record and the ideas but he himself is a very hard sell. Paul is old, lacks a strong voice and so on... My intension was not to claim the GOP needed to elect Paul but rather look at the future and ask themselves, do you keep going to the left in hopes that you win over progressives, or do you take a chance and put up a conservative with a record?

Mitt is about the most Progressive candidate alive today under the Republican or Democrat banner. There is a reason the slogan was “Anyone But Obama!!” Because the "conservative" standard was at it’s lowest.

They need to keep going to the left if they hope to ever win again.

There aren't any Conservatives out there with a good enough record, and secondly I think the appeal of the textbook Conservative isn't quite what it used to be.
 
OP
Avorysuds

Avorysuds

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
13,834
Reaction score
1,658
Points
245
Location
Eugene Oregon
Ron Paul lost almost every race he ever ran. He polls poorly among traditional conservatives, to say nothing of liberals, who think he's crazy.
The idea that Paul would have won the general election is so absurd it wouldn't even fly as an article in The Onion.

Hey look everyone, the guy that wanted Rick Perry is telling us who would've been a better choice.

:lol:

He also voted for Mitt Romney... yeah, how did that turn out?
 

dblack

Diamond Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
41,140
Reaction score
6,951
Points
1,830
As I see it, had Paul been the nominee he would have easily received all the votes Romney secured last night, if anything to vote against, and to try to remove Obama from power.

Plenty of Romney supporters would (correctly) see Obama as more in tune with their values than Romney. And the media would find much to scare 'Joe the Plumber' with if someone like Paul took point.

He's certainly more likable than the guy they had up there.

Well, likeability is an entirely subjective matter. Lots of people are turned off by Paul's cantankerous ideologue schtick. I find it refreshing, especially when he's laying out obvious truth that everyone else wants to ignore. But the sad fact is, a lot of people prefer their delusions and a smiling weatherman hack like Romney is more their speed. These people would likely vote Obama (he has a fairly good smile himself) over Paul.
 

bobcollum

Rookie
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
9,428
Reaction score
1,038
Points
0
Location
where I'm located

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$166.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top