Barack Obama vs. Ron Paul

KDH12

yahamita wrote:

cajunkiwi wrote:

yahamita wrote:

I know enough to know I hate Obama and would vote for Krusty the Clown before I put a socialist/non-American, non- Constutionalist into office. My conscience won't allow it to happen.

Normally I try to refrain from making personal attacks... but... did someone have to help you log on to use the internet? Do you even know what socialism is?

And how stupid do you have to be to still believe the non-American stuff? Let me guess... the moon landing was faked, and bigfoot is also totally real and goes snowboarding with you every July...

Thanks for the bash, but here in Oregon, we DO believe in Bigfoot! many sitings around the Cascade Lakes, and if you believe that Obama will pay all your bills and everyone else will be responsible for your shortcomings and your lack of self motivation to succeed and make your own way, then you are def on the right track to Obamanation...and where is all this proof that he is American? I am NOT a republican, but a constitutionalist, but I guess you find it ok to change or get rid of this valuable document? Are you in your 20's by the way?

I was born, raised and lived a good majority of my life in Oregon, many of those years spent in the woods and never saw a bigfoot

but please stop posting you are making all the other Oregonians look bad

KDH12

mikepegg44 wrote:

KDH12 wrote:

I think that state governments should be either eliminated or significantly scaled down, there is no need for states to have two houses with as many members as they have......IMO

wait ... what? I am maybe not understanding you, can you clarify this statement?

edit* yikes, I hate when I move to fast and forget to check spelling

huh?

I think state governments should be scaled down, they are the ones that are too big, they function worse then the feds..... in most cases

mikepegg44

KDH12 wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

KDH12 wrote:

I think that state governments should be either eliminated or significantly scaled down, there is no need for states to have two houses with as many members as they have......IMO

wait ... what? I am maybe not understanding you, can you clarify this statement?

edit* yikes, I hate when I move to fast and forget to check spelling

huh?

I think state governments should be scaled down, they are the ones that are too big, they function worse then the feds..... in most cases

this is the probably the biggest reason I am slowly but surely turning my back on the democratic party. State and local governments should have a much larger impact on your life, the feds impact should only be very minimal. It is odd to me that you would think one form of government too big, do you also believe the feds should be shrunk down? or do you believe we should all be one country and leave the states behind? not attacking just wondering

he still stands

I'd vote for Ron Paul, just because I want to see some drama. I think he'd actually bring home the troops and would get the government out of my life. Shit, he'd probably stop making me get car inspections, drive 3 miles to a "beer distributor", stop the state from checking up on my car insurance, tear down those damn security cameras in my city, get rid of half the pigs, let people do business freely, etc. I don't know if his plans would work in the long term but it would be a fun ride. I have a feeling his policies would make the rich richer and the poor poorer, everyone would have guns, and most people would be mad as hell. Not a good combo.

unsung

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

as for the second point, what does anyone's age have to do with anything?? most change and progress comes from young people with young minds that see the way things could be instead of dwelling on how bad things are. the former is for the young, the latter is what the old do...

That is great to have ideas and energy but most young 20-somethings have no idea how the world really works, they just know what their professors' political beliefs are and what the frat house wants to drink tonight.

Get a real job, a house, a family, pay bills, get a real paycheck. Then see if you feel the same way. Until then, until you actually have those things stop pretending your "beliefs" reflect the general consensus.

unsung

Starfall wrote:

repealing birthright citizenship, the outright disbandment of Social Security

Two things I am very much in support of.

gimmesometruth27

unsung wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

as for the second point, what does anyone's age have to do with anything?? most change and progress comes from young people with young minds that see the way things could be instead of dwelling on how bad things are. the former is for the young, the latter is what the old do...

That is great to have ideas and energy but most young 20-somethings have no idea how the world really works, they just know what their professors' political beliefs are and what the frat house wants to drink tonight.

Get a real job, a house, a family, pay bills, get a real paycheck. Then see if you feel the same way. Until then, until you actually have those things stop pretending your "beliefs" reflect the general consensus.

oh really man, please... so you are saying that one has no idea how the world works unless they suck up what their professors tell them?? what about the ones who drop the hell out and have no professors and get jobs, are they dumbasses that don't know how the world works?? so are you saying that until they have a house, a family, pay bills and a real paycheck they won't know how the world works or have potential to change things for the better?? there are 30 year olds that don't have thses things. just because you and i do does not mean we can be all high and mighty and dismissive of the younger generation's beliefs and what they feel is important. correct me if i am wrong, but there has been no sweeping changes in this country since lbj with the civil rights movement, and that was jfk and rfk's plans and it was their doing. young minds=fresh ideas...

unsung

I'm saying the professors do their best to brainwash them. And I didn't say all 20-somethings, I said most. Try reading before replying.

KDH12

mikepegg44 wrote:

KDH12 wrote:

huh?

I think state governments should be scaled down, they are the ones that are too big, they function worse then the feds..... in most cases

this is the probably the biggest reason I am slowly but surely turning my back on the democratic party. State and local governments should have a much larger impact on your life, the feds impact should only be very minimal. It is odd to me that you would think one form of government too big, do you also believe the feds should be shrunk down? or do you believe we should all be one country and leave the states behind? not attacking just wondering

I get what you are saying but things going in different directions in different states is bad IMO

on an extreme case look at a place like Iraq different tribes/villages all trying to govern themselves, there is no cohesion

less extreme look at gay marriage or medical marijuana laws in this country. regardless if you support or oppose these issues, it is turning out to be a huge mess having each state have different laws on these issues instead of one general federal law.

gimmesometruth27

unsung wrote:

I'm saying the professors do their best to brainwash them. And I didn't say all 20-somethings, I said most. Try reading before replying.

i don't know what college you attended, and i do not know what you studied, but where does this occur? i majored in science so there was no professor brainwashing there, because it is fucking SCIENCE...the classes i took that were not science encouraged critical thinking and trying to see both sides of the situation, again no professor brainwashing there either....for once why don't you try to post without generalizing an entire generation or an entire section of the population, or the entire educational system?

mikepegg44

KDH12 wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

KDH12 wrote:

huh?

I think state governments should be scaled down, they are the ones that are too big, they function worse then the feds..... in most cases

this is the probably the biggest reason I am slowly but surely turning my back on the democratic party. State and local governments should have a much larger impact on your life, the feds impact should only be very minimal. It is odd to me that you would think one form of government too big, do you also believe the feds should be shrunk down? or do you believe we should all be one country and leave the states behind? not attacking just wondering

I get what you are saying but things going in different directions in different states is bad IMO

on an extreme case look at a place like Iraq different tribes/villages all trying to govern themselves, there is no cohesion

less extreme look at gay marriage or medical marijuana laws in this country. regardless if you support or oppose these issues, it is turning out to be a huge mess having each state have different laws on these issues instead of one general federal law.

sure, it can get confusing if you live in a ton of places all at once, but really it isn't that confusing. States rights were and are an extremely important part of the constitution. States should be able to govern themselves, the federal government should only step in when one of the states creates a law that violates the constitution. I have no problem with california being able to have legal medical marijuana and other states not having it. That is what the people of that particular state wanted, if it was wanted elsewhere people have the ability to get it passed in their own states. If everyone but florida wanted it to be legal than Florida should have the choice to make illegal unless it violates the U.S. constitution.

KDH12

so then would you allow the same state autonomy on issues like abortion

mikepegg44

KDH12 wrote:

so then would you allow the same state autonomy on issues like abortion

No. It has already been decided that a woman has a "right" to an abortion. Personally I would love for abortions to stop, but the government has no right to tell a woman what she can do with her body and that issue has already been decided.
Like I said, states should be able to do whatever they want as long as it does not violate the federal constitution and the rights guaranteed within. You can come up with examples of things that are controversial all day long, but you will always get the same answer from me.

OffHeGoes29

I'm still trying to find the posts showing 80% of the people on this board voting for Obama.

VINNY GOOMBA

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

I'm still trying to find the posts showing 80% of the people on this board voting for Obama.

Interesting isn't it? I really don't know that 80% of the people on this board would vote for Obama over Ron Paul if this was an actual election scenario. That was the point of this thread. I would like to see a greater sampling of how people would actually vote here.

Don't be bashful, everyone! Think of this as your usual "lesser of 2 evils" election that we are up against every four years, and vote on principle-- not (D)s and (R)s.

VINNY GOOMBA

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

I'm still trying to find the posts showing 80% of the people on this board voting for Obama.

Interesting isn't it? I really don't know that 80% of the people on this board would vote for Obama over Ron Paul if this was an actual election scenario. That was the point of this thread. I would like to see a greater sampling of how people would actually vote here.

Don't be bashful, everyone! Think of this as your usual "lesser of 2 evils" election that we are up against every four years, and vote on principle-- not (D)s and (R)s.

Or vote (D)s and (R)s if that's what you want to do. Discuss the candidates if you'd like, but make sure you reply with who you would pick between these two.

OffHeGoes29

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

I'm still trying to find the posts showing 80% of the people on this board voting for Obama.

Interesting isn't it? I really don't know that 80% of the people on this board would vote for Obama over Ron Paul if this was an actual election scenario. That was the point of this thread. I would like to see a greater sampling of how people would actually vote here.

Don't be bashful, everyone! Think of this as your usual "lesser of 2 evils" election that we are up against every four years, and vote on principle-- not (D)s and (R)s.

From what I remember, its was that high for Obama vs McCain on a couple of polls taken on this board almost two years ago. I just find it funny that some of the same people here voted for him now want him out.

South of Seattle

RP FTW!

VINNY GOOMBA

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

I'm still trying to find the posts showing 80% of the people on this board voting for Obama.

Interesting isn't it? I really don't know that 80% of the people on this board would vote for Obama over Ron Paul if this was an actual election scenario. That was the point of this thread. I would like to see a greater sampling of how people would actually vote here.

Don't be bashful, everyone! Think of this as your usual "lesser of 2 evils" election that we are up against every four years, and vote on principle-- not (D)s and (R)s.

From what I remember, its was that high for Obama vs McCain on a couple of polls taken on this board almost two years ago. I just find it funny that some of the same people here voted for him now want him out.

That makes sense in an Obama vs. McCain scenario here on the Train, and that was BEFORE Obama took office, when all he could be held to were his campaign promises, which sounded pretty good to true principled liberals. Paul and McCain are night and day in terms of their political beliefs.

With a little over a year under his belt, people have had some time (not much, but some time) to determine whether he will at least TRY to deliver on some of his campaign ideas.

Would Dr. Paul be able to accomplish everything he'd like to in office? Of course not. No president does. So for those who view this guy as a radical anarchist, fear not. We all know that even if that was his true agenda (which it clearly isn't if you've ever listened to him or read his works at length), we wound only end up with a watered down version of his "libertarian-anarchy."

Anyway, OffHeGoes, your vote?

gimmesometruth27

i find it humorous and ironic that ron paul, the man the republicans dismissed as a "kook" and was not allowed to be heard in debates not two years ago is now making headway... if we pull out of this recession and people get back to work nobody that the gop runs would beat obama.