Jump to content

Who do you support for president?


ec437

Recommended Posts

  • Members

 

Bad politics aside...

Clinton can't win simply because she's a woman.

 

 

Being a woman has nothing to do with it. She's the anti-christ!

She a egotistical , socialist.

I'd rather burn all my basses then vote for that witch.

(sorry,I spelled that last word wrong)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

 

It would be nice to make headway with the different minority groups, though. At some point a sizeable percentage of these groups have to see what a bunch of little splinters the Democrat party essentially comprises and that the message isn't all that inclusive.

 

 

There is a huge groundswell from young black conservatives. it's been growing for many years. They are done with what has been sold to them for decades (quotas, affirmative action, candy'coating the problems in the black community and blaming it on whitey, etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Being a woman has nothing to do with it. She's the anti-christ!

She a egotistical , socialist.

I'd rather burn all my basses then vote for that witch.

(sorry,I spelled that last word wrong)

 

 

If you change your mind, just send me your basses. I'll burn them for you , I promise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

If he doesn't get the Republican nom. or run in the Libertarian Party, I will just write his name in on the ballot.

+1

SICK of voting for "the one that isn't the worst".

 

Romulan: Buy the people, afford the people

Huckster: Pick some RP ideas and put "religion" on them. Check his record for the real Huck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I don't know, man. I'm not saying she's a shoe-in, but the Clinton Political Machine plays to win. For good or for awesome, they are good at winning elections.

 

Yep, her team is very, very good. I kinda wonder how the public bickering with Obama will play out though. Pretty pathetic on both sides IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Whoever wins.

 

 

I'll support who ever wins. I'm not mad about the choices, but someone has to do it.

 

As for those who continue to opine 'He's still not my president....' By law, he is. Whether you like Bush or not, he's the Prez. Dry your eyes, blow your nose, get over it and hope your candidate wins this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I'll support who ever wins. I'm not mad about the choices, but someone has to do it.


As for those who continue to opine 'He's still not my president....' By law, he is. Whether you like Bush or not, he's the Prez. Dry your eyes, blow your nose, get over it and hope your candidate wins this time.

 

 

yeah, quit crying and vote harder pussies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I'll support who ever wins. I'm not mad about the choices, but someone has to do it.


As for those who continue to opine 'He's still not my president....' By law, he is. Whether you like Bush or not, he's the Prez. Dry your eyes, blow your nose, get over it and hope your candidate wins this time.

 

 

yup. bunch of pussies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Actually, from a lot of reading I have done on this - it appears to me that the
legal
latino community is actually split fairly evenly on the issue. Some find it offensive to be targeting mexicans (which is a good 80% of the issue) and others, who worked hard to gain legal status here feel that everyone should do so.


And, fact is, the GOP isn't very strong with latino voters anyway, so I don't think it will really be a problem. I don't think it NEEDS to be overcome.

 

...this has been my thinking all long...the # of lost votes may be minimal while the possibility of gained votes could be substantial, especially from former Reagan Democrats...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I agree that there's probably more voting fraud than we even realize, but I doubt it's due to illegals, and I think the voter id business is nothing but a return to Jim Crow laws, may as well bring back the poll tax while you're at it.

 

 

 

Equating Voter ID Laws to Jim Crow is truly pathetic - it smacks of Democrats wanting to preserve their tradition of "vote early, vote often" - besides hanging on to the illegal alien and felon vote...

 

There is absolutely NO valid reason why a person shouldn't have to show ID to vote - other than to place an illegal vote...

 

 

 

- georgestrings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep, her team is very, very good. I kinda wonder how the public bickering with Obama will play out though. Pretty pathetic on both sides IMO.

 

 

 

Yeah, no kidding. Honestly, I like them both, but am liking them less the more I hear about this. :mad:

 

 

Oh...and Ron Paul...racist conspiracy nut at worst, irresponsible at best. Those newsletters were just ridiculous. Big thumbs down on that one.

 

Once again, every candidate has so many huge flaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The dems are not in touch with reality. The fact is that Obama & Clinton can't get any of the conservative vote, and that's still the majority in this country. Most political conservatives are quiet and not necessarily driven to vote, but either of those jokers on the ballot will bring them out in droves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

You know, I've heard this kind of thing before from people (mostly people that don't have a clue what they are talking about), so I'm gonna ask you to back this statement up.

 

 

A google search of "Ron Paul white nationalist" came up with some interesting claims. Don't know how substantiated they are, but as a minority it shoots up a lot of red flags for me.

 

There's also the issue of the "racist" news letter he published way back in the day. He claims that he didn't have anything to do with it, but I'm pretty sure it was his official news letter (I saw it floating around CNN a few weeks back, can't seem to find the article now).

 

Now, both those claims are pretty unsubstantiated. I'd need to see solid proof if I were a Paul supporter, but as someone who disagrees with him, it's more of a "whatever, I'm not voting for him anyway."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

A google search of "Ron Paul white nationalist" came up with some interesting claims. Don't know how substantiated they are, but as a minority it shoots up a lot of red flags for me.


There's also the issue of the "racist" news letter he published way back in the day. He claims that he didn't have anything to do with it, but I'm pretty sure it was his official news letter (I saw it floating around CNN a few weeks back, can't seem to find the article now).


Now, both those claims are pretty unsubstantiated. I'd need to see solid proof if I were a Paul supporter, but as someone who disagrees with him, it's more of a "whatever, I'm not voting for him anyway."

 

 

Not voting for him is one thing......

 

and the newsletter {censored} wasn't him. The guy who wrote that drivel was also fired IIRC.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Not voting for him is one thing......


and the newsletter {censored} wasn't him. The guy who wrote that drivel was also fired IIRC.

 

 

It was published under his name. Now, at the very least, it shows that he's not paying attention to what people are writing and attaching his name to. EDIT: IMO, he should have dealt with it when the letter was published. Did he send out apologies or retractions when it was?

 

Here's the linky: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/index.html?iref=newssearch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...