View Full Version : IF the elections were today,
BambinoBear
04-25-2007, 12:54 PM
Who would you vote for?
Nixon's Head
04-25-2007, 12:56 PM
Is that Barack Obama?
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 12:57 PM
Oh boy, this should be a nice quiet debate
BambinoBear
04-25-2007, 01:04 PM
Is that Barack Obama?
My Bad. Yea.
BambinoBear
04-25-2007, 01:08 PM
Oh boy, this should be a nice quiet debate
I'm curious as to where people stand.
I have 3 people I could vote for and right now Rudy leads the pack. The other 2 are Obama and John Edwards.
I'm curious as to where people stand.
I have 3 people I could vote for and right now Rudy leads the pack. The other 2 are Obama and John Edwards.
I just put Edwards based on the 04 election. After all was said and done, I felt he would've been a much better candidate than Kerry. As for the upcoming election, it's too early for me to base anything on what I've heard, so I just went with what I knew from back then.
Of course, I would've also voted for McCain as late as a couple years ago...but not anymore. The thing that made me like him was more than likely the thing that kept him from winning the nomination...
hannitykillspuppies
04-25-2007, 01:41 PM
the better poll question would be, will the democrats ever find an electible candidate.
i chose rudy. lesser of all the other evils listed, imo.
Vegas
04-25-2007, 01:43 PM
the better poll question would be, will the democrats ever find an electible candidate.
i chose rudy. lesser of all the other evils listed, imo.
Do you like Joe Lieberman? I would have voted for him over Bush in the last election.
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 02:00 PM
Do you like Joe Lieberman? I would have voted for him over Bush in the last election.
As would I. Alas, his own party seems to have turned against him for being a moderate.
BoredWithNoSB
04-25-2007, 02:05 PM
What's Perot up to these days?
hannitykillspuppies
04-25-2007, 02:25 PM
As would I. Alas, his own party seems to have turned against him for being a moderate.
this will be the main reason rudy won't get the republican nod. why present the best available minds when we can have puppets run for president.
hannitykillspuppies
04-25-2007, 02:27 PM
Do you like Joe Lieberman? I would have voted for him over Bush in the last election.
i like him, but don't feel he's a viable candidate.
pnkpanther
04-25-2007, 02:31 PM
once again, it's a choice between two bowls of shit
once again, it's a choice between two bowls of shit
I guess I feel like they still haven't proven Obama to be a bowl of shit.
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 03:04 PM
I guess I feel like they still haven't proven Obama to be a bowl of shit.
It's early. There is a reason why their hasn't been a senator elected to the house since Kennedy.
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 03:14 PM
Do you like Joe Lieberman? I would have voted for him over Bush in the last election.
*
*
Of course you would.
Lieberman is an under the sheets Republican.
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 03:14 PM
*
*
Of course you would.
Lieberman is an under the sheets Republican.
Of course he is, because he had the audacity to disagree with the far left. But hey, have fun with Al Sharpton
I'd rather have an under the sheets repub or democrat that can work with both sides than an extreme clown only wanting to do things one way even if completely wrong. Call me crazy.
Vegas
04-25-2007, 03:20 PM
I'd rather have an under the sheets repub or democrat that can work with both sides than an extreme clown only wanting to do things one way even if completely wrong. Call me crazy.
You're crazy.
hannitykillspuppies
04-25-2007, 03:20 PM
*
*
Of course you would.
Lieberman is an under the sheets Republican.
what's the deal with the stars?
what's the deal with the stars?
In hidden text are Barry Bonds' stats.
Of course he is, because he had the audacity to disagree with the far left. But hey, have fun with Al Sharpton
The far left. If they are in our government I have trouble finding them. If you define far left as wanting to get teh hell out of Iraq. We have a very far left country.
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 03:23 PM
I'd rather have an under the sheets repub or democrat that can work with both sides than an extreme clown only wanting to do things one way even if completely wrong. Call me crazy.
No, you're right, but I think those guys are gone for the time being. Both sides play the other off as extremists, the Democrats being the elite Hollywood liberals, the Republicans are the religious nut, war loving, hillbillies. States are red and blue, if you try to work with somebody else, or don't agree with your party line, your isolated.
The far left. If they are in our government I have trouble finding them. If you define far left as wanting to get teh hell out of Iraq. We have a very far left country.
But you can't base alignment on one issue. There are people on the right that want out of Iraq, and they're not far left.
But Lieberman got ousted in the primary because LaMont came in with what was considered a far left viewpoint. Of course, that was just the viewpoint of the registered democrats in Vermont. Nowhere near a representative sample of the country (or even Vermont as it turned out).
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 03:24 PM
The far left. If they are in our government I have trouble finding them. If you define far left as wanting to get teh hell out of Iraq. We have a very far left country.
To kick the guy out of the party because he disagreed with opposition for the war?
No, you're right, but I think those guys are gone for the time being. Both sides play the other off as extremists, the Democrats being the elite Hollywood liberals, the Republicans are the religious nut, war loving, hillbillies. States are red and blue, if you try to work with somebody else, or don't agree with your party line, your isolated.
Well, you're called traitor, flip flopper, spineless, etc in addition to being isolated.
That's why I'm considering Rudy. He's more towards the middle (or was) based on his social viewpoint, i.e., keep the government out of personal lives...but conservative on defense and such. I can live with that, even if he is pro-war.
The war is a big issue. But to me, it's still just 1 issue of many.
To kick the guy out of the party because he disagreed with opposition for the war?
They kicked him out of the party?
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 03:28 PM
They kicked him out of the party?
Essentially. Wouldn't let him join the 2004 primary. Funneled a ton of money up to Vermont to stop his reelection in 2006.
But you can't base alignment on one issue. There are people on the right that want out of Iraq, and they're not far left.
But Lieberman got ousted in the primary because LaMont came in with what was considered a far left viewpoint. Of course, that was just the viewpoint of the registered democrats in Vermont. Nowhere near a representative sample of the country (or even Vermont as it turned out).
I don't believe Lamont had a far left viewpoint other than get out of Iraq. That election was solely about Iraq IMO.
To kick the guy out of the party because he disagreed with opposition for the war?
He wasn't kicked out of the party.
I don't believe Lamont had a far left viewpoint other than get out of Iraq. That election was solely about Iraq IMO.
I agree, and I don't understand at the same time. There's more to the world than 1 issue. I don't get it being made into 1 issue. But I don't live in VT, so that's their business.
As for his viewpoint, didn't he call for immediate withdrawals? At the time of the elections, that was a pretty leftist viewpoint. Now it's a bit more mainstream, but at the time immediate wasn't the popular choice...eventual, yes...but not immediate.
Essentially. Wouldn't let him join the 2004 primary. Funneled a ton of money up to Vermont to stop his reelection in 2006.
HE LOST THE PRIMARY!get your facts straight.
HE LOST THE PRIMARY!
In 2004?
This is why Lieberman fell out of favor. Its the stupid making progress manipulation that everyone isn't buying anymore. They are sill saying it today. Just give it time. Bullshit.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007611
In 2004?
Yes, he lost the 06 primary for Democratic senator from CONNECTICUT then ran as an independent.
Yes, he lost the 06 primary for Democratic senator from CONNECTICUT then ran as an independent.
My bad, CT, not VT.
Either way, Smash was talking about him not being in the 2004 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY, not the 2006 SENATORIAL PRIMARY. But he did say that the Dems put money into CT to stop his reelection in 2006.
Or am I confused about what years you're talking about?
Also, most Dems said and followed through that they would support the winner of teh democratic primary, which is what they did.
Or actually its because they are leftists and Ned Lamont was actually Chavez.
Also, most Dems said and followed through that they would support the winner of teh democratic primary, which is what they did.
Or actually its because they are leftists and Ned Lamont was actually Chavez.
I agree with the first part.
But if our conversations are going to be turned into the second part, then I'll have to bow out for more productive causes.
My bad, CT, not VT.
Either way, Smash was talking about him not being in the 2004 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY, not the 2006 SENATORIAL PRIMARY. But he did say that the Dems put money into CT to stop his reelection in 2006.
Or am I confused about what years you're talking about?
Well also, the Dems can't keep him out of the primary.
On February 3, 2004, Lieberman withdrew his candidacy after failing to win any of the five primaries or two caucuses held that day. He acknowledged to the Hartford Courant that his support for the war in Iraq was a large part of his undoing with voters.[22]
I agree with the first part.
But if our conversations are going to be turned into the second part, then I'll have to bow out for more productive causes.
I can be sarcastic in trying to make a point. Allow me to say it this way.
We have no leftists in our government. The very fact that every Senator we have was a millionaire before he was in office precludes taht from even being an actual option. Kucinich is the only one close. We should have some. We definitely have those on the far right.
I can be sarcastic in trying to make a point. Allow me to say it this way.
We have no leftists in our government. The very fact that every Senator we have was a millionaire before he was in office precludes taht from even being an actual option. Kucinich is the only one close. We should have some. We definitely have those on the far right.
Is that what that was?
As for the rest, positioning is relative. If you're as far left as you say you are, there are very few people anywhere that you would view as "far" left.
As for what we should and shouldn't have, as a result of the reps being voted by the people, then your cause doesn't have enough people or else there would be people in place that were left enough for you.
Is that what that was?
As for the rest, positioning is relative. If you're as far left as you say you are, there are very few people anywhere that you would view as "far" left.
As for what we should and shouldn't have, as a result of the reps being voted by the people, then your cause doesn't have enough people or else there would be people in place that were left enough for you.
And you believe that we still live in a real democracy? Over 50% of teh people in our country don't vote in Presidential elections.
Look, I am not far enough left to believe in the policies of Castro or Chavez, but I see their value and don't see them as idiots. We do not have a true representation of the left in our country in government. That is my opinion. Just because many people would want it doesn't make it so. If you think the barriers to entering a Senate Race or House race are small enough that there anyone can run, I have to disagree. The only way to become a Senator, House member or pretty much anyone in our government is to work with corporations to get funding, have alot of funding personally, or somehow make your own news (which would backfire). Show me an example of anyone who has gotten in without that. Those people don't tend to be leftists. Leftists don't tend to have much of a viewpoint at all when it comes to countries dominated by corporations.
Vegas
04-25-2007, 03:56 PM
I can be sarcastic in trying to make a point. Allow me to say it this way.
We have no leftists in our government. The very fact that every Senator we have was a millionaire before he was in office precludes taht from even being an actual option. Kucinich is the only one close. We should have some. We definitely have those on the far right.
Ted Kennedy
Barbara Boxer
Christopher Dodd
John Kerry
Nancy Pelosi
etc.
And you believe that we still live in a real democracy? Over 50% of teh people in our country don't vote in Presidential elections.
apathy does not make the country undemocratic.
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 04:04 PM
Also, most Dems said and followed through that they would support the winner of teh democratic primary, which is what they did.
Or actually its because they are leftists and Ned Lamont was actually Chavez.
Actually, that's not quite true. Most democratic senators sided against the incumbent of their own party. At the time, 18 were undecided, and 3 went for Lieberman. I guess that happens all the time, when a guy who was your vice presidential candidate six years before has a majority of his peers supporting his rival in a primary. (BTW, the website were that pic came from is www.democrats.org)
http://a264.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/2/l_ee50bc6f0c2af5ef26cebdaf797302a7.jpg
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 04:17 PM
Of course he is, because he had the audacity to disagree with the far left. But hey, have fun with Al Sharpton
*
*
One more time.
Let's see if this has a chance of registering?
Lieberman, or anyone like you, can disagree all you want.
It's an opinion ... no more, no less.
Just like mine, It's an opinion ... no more, no less.
They are not attacks.
Only to the tenderous of the tender, is an opposing viewpoint considered as a personal attack.
In my sweetest tone, a Tip to the Tender:
I try to avoid you.
Stay out of other people's debates.
Altough you want the attention.
If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
About Lieberman, he has his agenda, and the US is not the top of his priority.
Just so that you wont misread me.
Let me simplify for you what I'm not into.
1. Programmed Party Parrots from either sides of the aisle.
2. Anyone, from any side of the aisle that wants to continue the MESS that Bush started for another day.
Ted Kennedy
Barbara Boxer
Christopher Dodd
John Kerry
Nancy Pelosi
etc.
Far left?
I know its all about perspective but I really disagree here. They would all be considered moderates an Europe or Latin America.
Actually, that's not quite true. Most democratic senators sided against the incumbent of their own party. At the time, 18 were undecided, and 3 went for Lieberman. I guess that happens all the time, when a guy who was your vice presidential candidate six years before has a majority of his peers supporting his rival in a primary. (BTW, the website were that pic came from is www.democrats.org)
http://a264.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/2/l_ee50bc6f0c2af5ef26cebdaf797302a7.jpg
Sided against him after he lost the primary. Dems were pretty mum before teh primary, but that is just from memory and it hasn't served me well today.
apathy does not make the country undemocratic.
Elections for sale do IMO
Jiddy78
04-25-2007, 04:24 PM
vBulletin Message
You did not select an option to vote for. Please press back to return to the poll and choose an option before voting.
Jiddy78
04-25-2007, 04:25 PM
vBulletin Message
You did not select an option to vote for. Please press back to return to the poll and choose an option before voting.
I call it a "Hanging Jiddy"...
I call it a "Hanging Jiddy"...
I don't ever want to see a "Hanging Jiddy".
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 04:32 PM
*
*
One more time.
Let's see if this has a chance of registering?
Lieberman, or anyone like you, can disagree all you want.
It's an opinion ... no more, no less.
Just like mine, It's an opinion ... no more, no less.
They are not attacks.
Only to the tenderous of the tender, is an opposing viewpoint considered as a personal attack.
In my sweetest tone, a Tip to the Tender:
I try to avoid you.
Stay out of other people's debates.
Altough you want the attention.
If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
About Lieberman, he has his agenda, and the US is not the top of his priority.
Just so that you wont misread me.
Let me simplify for you what I'm not into.
1. Programmed Party Parrots from either sides of the aisle.
2. Anyone, from any side of the aisle that wants to continue the MESS that Bush started for another day.
Ah, the personal insults from Potomac Yank. That took long. The next thing you debate will be the first. You don't get your way, you start with the name calling. Personally, I could care less at this point what your into, because it's always the same thing. For you to call anyone a parrot is ridiculous, since if there is anyone who repeats the same thing over, and over, and over, and over again, it's you.
I really could care less about the attention, I was just bringing up the point how the Democratic party abandoned many of the moderates that used to be the life blood of the party. But, that was my mistake. I should have instead said Bush Brigade, or better yet, put it in bold Bush Brigade. Then, I through some names around at other posters, hmm, ok, chicken-con, Neo-Hawk, oh, and tender.
Maybe
I'll
put
it
like
this
to prove
my
point
I don't have to misread you, I know exactly who and what you are. You live in a nice little world where anyone who has the audacity to disagree with you is either naive, evil, or stupid. Not only that, you place them under little headings, and little groups, because it's simplifies life for you, you being the right, everyone else being wrong. From most everything you write, I would guess your probably bitter that your right opinions seem not to effect anyone but yourself, and those who agree with you.
So, in closing, just so you know me, let me simplify what I'm into. If you disagree with me, fine, that's cool. Just like when I talk sports, I'm interested in all kinds of opinions. But if you're going to be a bitter, nasty, disrespectful person, well then you can enjoy your opinions, and everyone who agrees with you, but I'm not going to waste my time with you anymore.
http://www.x4csclan.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/lmao.jpg
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/zoom/lmao-new.jpg
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 04:38 PM
Will someone please help Reagan off that cross. :)
Nixon's Head
04-25-2007, 04:40 PM
Ted Kennedy
Barbara Boxer
Christopher Dodd
John Kerry
Nancy Pelosi
etc.Would Evan Bayh make that list? I've always been a big fan of him.
Will someone please help Reagan off that cross. :)
Can't you reach him with your soap box?
Can't you reach him with your soap box?
Take it easy guys. Lets not get too personal. I see lots of attacks going both ways on this one.
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 04:55 PM
Can't you reach him with your soap box?
*
*
LSU, I tried to reach for his ankle, but the son of god has tender skin, and my hand slipped.
After reading his signature, I understand why he is what he is.
He's still going through the teenage mode of trying to find himself.
Point is, how is he going to feel when he finds out?
Maybe it's best to leave him on that cross? :)
i_hate_righties
04-25-2007, 05:24 PM
My father always said...You should never tell anyone who you voted for in an election, and youre never supposed to tell anyone how much money you make!
'Lifer
04-25-2007, 05:28 PM
My father always said...You should never tell anyone who you voted for in an election, and youre never supposed to tell anyone how much money you make!
Doesn't religion complete the forbidden talk topics?
hannitykillspuppies
04-25-2007, 05:30 PM
Can't you reach him with your soap box?
no, he'd have to climb down off his cross to be able to stand on a soap box.
Jiddy78
04-25-2007, 05:41 PM
My father always said...You should never tell anyone who you voted for in an election, and youre never supposed to tell anyone how much money you make!
Ever wonder why?
Blood in the streets baby.
I'm an open book....I'll be slaughtered.
i_hate_righties
04-25-2007, 05:42 PM
Doesn't religion complete the forbidden talk topics?
apparently not if youre catholic!:rolleyes:
Jiddy78
04-25-2007, 05:43 PM
Take it easy guys. Lets not get too personal. I see lots of attacks going both ways on this one.
I agree...Y'all need to calm down and do what I do when posters piss me off...Take it out on your spouse.
i_hate_righties
04-25-2007, 05:45 PM
I agree...Y'all need to calm down and do what I do when posters piss me off...Take it out on your spouse.
How the hell do you have 593 posts on here already?
Jiddy78
04-25-2007, 05:46 PM
How the hell do you have 593 posts on here already?
Politics is my life.
BYAAAAAHHHHH!!!
i_hate_righties
04-25-2007, 05:47 PM
Politics is my life.
BYAAAAAHHHHH!!!
I would vote for you for internet president!
*
*
LSU, I tried to reach for his ankle, but the son of god has tender skin, and my hand slipped.
After reading his signature, I understand why he is what he is.
He's still going through the teenage mode of trying to find himself.
Point is, how is he going to feel when he finds out?
Maybe it's best to leave him on that cross? :)
Maybe you could lend him your high horse.
i_hate_righties
04-25-2007, 05:55 PM
Maybe you could lend him your high horse.
I have a high horse I could lend, 17 hands...but I would suggest anyone wanting to get on him take lessons first!
I have a high horse I could lend, 17 hands...but I would suggest anyone wanting to get on him take lessons first!
What do you mean by "get on him"?
i_hate_righties
04-25-2007, 06:03 PM
What do you mean by "get on him"?
he's a gelding....you mount a horse!
...you mount a horse!
You should make a video sometime.
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 06:20 PM
no, he'd have to climb down off his cross to be able to stand on a soap box.
Please, guys. I'm not on a cross. I'm Jewish, and unless someone's calling me Jesus, I ain't on no crosses.
Please, guys. I'm not on a cross. I'm Jewish, and unless someone's calling me Jesus, I ain't on no crosses.
Oh. So you're a Jesus killer. I hope you're proud.
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 06:32 PM
Oh. So you're a Jesus killer. I hope you're proud.
To quote Lisa Simpson: Is there any answer that I can give that won't result in more push-ups?
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 07:40 PM
Maybe you could lend him your high horse.
*
*
You really should something about your self esteem.
*
*
You really should something about your self esteem.
http://www.bournemouthhypnotherapy.co.uk/confidence.gif
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 08:12 PM
http://www.bournemouthhypnotherapy.co.uk/confidence.gif
*
*
Can't top that one.
I luv It. :)
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 08:43 PM
Oh. So you're a Jesus killer. I hope you're proud.
*
*
Psssssst ... LSU ..... ova heah.
I want you to tell Reagan somethin, but I don't want him to know where you got it from.
Remember, when you tell him, .... be gentle, or is that gentile?
In a soft tone .... tell him that Jesus was also a Jew.
Do not make any sudden moves.
Otherwise he'll sound off the air raid alarms. :)
ryr8828
04-25-2007, 08:44 PM
*
*
Psssssst ... LSU ..... ova heah.
I want you to tell Reagan somethin, but I don't want him to know where you got it from.
Remember, when you tell him, .... be gentle, or is that gentile?
In a soft tone .... tell him that Jesus was also a Jew.
Do not make any sudden moves.
Otherwise he'll sound off the air raid alarms. :)
Jimmy Carter should be informed as well.
*
*
Psssssst ... LSU ..... ova heah.
I want you to tell Reagan somethin, but I don't want him to know where you got it from.
Remember, when you tell him, .... be gentle, or is that gentile?
In a soft tone .... tell him that Jesus was also a Jew.
Do not make any sudden moves.
Otherwise he'll sound off the air raid alarms. :)
Some obsessions are unhealthy.
No wait.
All are.
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 08:55 PM
Jimmy Carter should be informed as well.
*
*
Jimmy Carter is Jewish???
Why wasn't I invited to his Bar Mitzvah?
Reagan Smash
04-25-2007, 09:41 PM
*
*
Jimmy Carter is Jewish???
Why wasn't I invited to his Bar Mitzvah?
It must have been reformed. And yes, I know Jesus was Jewish, hence the quote being unless I was Jesus, I wouldn't be on any crosses. But, it's cool. I was wrong to pick fight with you, and wrong to get so upset.
Potomac Yank
04-25-2007, 10:36 PM
It must have been reformed. And yes, I know Jesus was Jewish, hence the quote being unless I was Jesus, I wouldn't be on any crosses. But, it's cool. I was wrong to pick fight with you, and wrong to get so upset.
*
*
Enough with the name calling ... I can take it.
More important.
Why wasn't I told that Jimmy C. was Jewish?
Did he convert at Camp David?
Did Menachem and Sadat act as witnesses?
Tune in tomorrow, same time - same station.
And find out.
What else happened at Camp David.
hannitykillspuppies
04-26-2007, 10:43 AM
It must have been reformed. And yes, I know Jesus was Jewish, hence the quote being unless I was Jesus, I wouldn't be on any crosses. But, it's cool. I was wrong to pick fight with you, and wrong to get so upset.
there were other people on crosses that day.
Reagan Smash
04-26-2007, 12:56 PM
there were other people on crosses that day.
Boy, that must have sucked. Oh did you hear, Joe was on the cross this week. Did he see Jesus? I don't think so, he was pretty busy dying? No, I don't know what Jesus was like? Do I have a piece of his hair?
Nixon's Head
04-26-2007, 03:55 PM
I agree...Y'all need to calm down and do what I do when posters piss me off...Take it out on your spouse.I really need a spouse.
swordfish
04-26-2007, 08:20 PM
Vote for Ron Paul. The first thing we need to do is stop the federal reserve. If the government was run the way it should be, instead of all these pissing contests like the ones in this post, we would all be fine with plenty of resources and good lives. Money runs everything. This includes the govt, corporations, religion, even personal moral choices. Politicians use money to persuade you to go along with whatever bullshit they want to throw at you. This goes for both parties. You can guarantee that any new laws are only taking away rights. They are happy to sponsor a bill if they can get good media coverage. They care not about the real life implications. The last right I remember people getting was when women were allowed to vote.
Iron Jaw
04-27-2007, 12:26 AM
It's early. There is a reason why their hasn't been a senator elected to the house since Kennedy.
At least, one who hasn't been in another position after completing senatorial duties. Richard Nixon was once a U.S. Senator. But he did two tours as the Veep afterwards. Lyndon Johnson was also a senator - but like Nixon, he did a partial tour as vice president and became president by succession prior to his presidential election win in 1964.
Iron Jaw
04-27-2007, 12:34 AM
Currently, I'll stick with McCain. Of the Republican candidates he would be my first choice. Then, Duncan Hunter.
Rudy is too liberal for my tastes. But considerably more conservative than those running on the opposing party's ticket. Thus, I'd vote for Rudy in a heartbeat over Hillary, Obama, Edwards or Gore. Once the dems ousted Dick Gephardt and sent Lieberman packing for the "middle" party, all conservatism on their side was out the door.
The_swami_sez
04-30-2007, 05:18 PM
Personally as a Republican I see the choice being clear. I would vote for Fred Thompson and I plan on voting for him in 2008.
ryr8828
04-30-2007, 05:26 PM
Glad I'm not alone.
Hotpapa666
05-02-2007, 03:14 AM
Everytime I hear Joe Biden talk I like what I hear. He seems like the kind of candidate that I would vote for. He seems honest.
Everytime I hear Joe Biden talk I like what I hear. He seems like the kind of candidate that I would vote for. He seems honest.
Biden reminds me of Kerry. Every time I see him doing an interview (and perhaps the debate, too) he makes some sort of vague off the wall joke that is not remotely funny...
BambinoBear
05-31-2007, 09:18 AM
If Fred Thompson does join the race he will be my front runner
Tom Joad
05-31-2007, 08:44 PM
I'm not sure who I'd vote for as of right now. The last time I took one of those online tests to see which candidate was most closely aligned to me, I was closest to Hillary Clinton. However, I want to see the Democratic debates before I make a decision.
ryr8828
05-31-2007, 09:02 PM
If Fred Thompson does join the race he will be my front runner
Let's get ready to get out the Thompson vote.
ryr8828
05-31-2007, 09:03 PM
Everytime I hear Joe Biden talk I like what I hear. He seems like the kind of candidate that I would vote for. He seems honest.
Comic relief.
ryr8828
05-31-2007, 09:03 PM
I'm not sure who I'd vote for as of right now. The last time I took one of those online tests to see which candidate was most closely aligned to me, I was closest to Hillary Clinton. However, I want to see the Democratic debates before I make a decision.
Hillary's in quite a problem right now. She's got some splainin to do but doesn't want to do it.
Ed Who?
06-01-2007, 07:34 AM
Hillary's in quite a problem right now. She's got some splainin to do but doesn't want to do it.
I have kept an on-again, off-again blog. Here was my take.
Link (http://rightreasoning.wordpress.com/2007/05/29/communism-version-41hillary-style/)
Andy Bulldog
06-01-2007, 11:57 AM
Cant vote on the poll,but I'd vote for Senator Brownback if elections were today..
Reagan Smash
06-01-2007, 03:28 PM
I'm convinced that whoever will get my vote must have been on Law & Order at least once.
Tom Joad
06-01-2007, 11:32 PM
I'm convinced that whoever will get my vote must have been on Law & Order at least once.
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/151/50717~Ice-T-Posters.jpg
Reagan Smash
06-01-2007, 11:37 PM
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/151/50717~Ice-T-Posters.jpg
If he could drop the lisp
Andy Bulldog
06-14-2007, 11:03 AM
Todays Polls show Clinton in the lead for Demos and Giuliani in the lead for Reps..
Who would you vote for?
Giuliani?
Clinton?
If I had to vote for either one of those,I'd vote Giuliani.
Todays Polls show Clinton in the lead for Demos and Guiliano in the lead for Reps..
Who would you vote for?
Guiliano?
Clinton?
If I had to vote for either one of those,I'd vote Guiliano.
He promises to keep fighting in the Middle East, so no thanks.
Andy Bulldog
06-14-2007, 11:05 AM
He promises to keep fighting in the Middle East, so no thanks.
So your a Hilaryite?
So your a Hilaryite?
No, I just will again vote against these jagoffs
Tom Joad
06-14-2007, 11:26 AM
Todays Polls show Clinton in the lead for Demos and Giuliani in the lead for Reps..
Who would you vote for?
Giuliani?
Clinton?
If I had to vote for either one of those,I'd vote Giuliani.
I'd vote Clinton.
Nixon's Head
06-14-2007, 12:41 PM
Hillary's in quite a problem right now. She's got some splainin to do but doesn't want to do it.About the snuke in her snizz?
Nixon's Head
06-14-2007, 12:43 PM
http://damselworld.com/prod_images_large/keith_richards_president_l1.jpg
Andy Bulldog
06-15-2007, 10:38 AM
I'd vote Clinton.
May I ask why,just curious,is it her pro murder stance on killing unborn babies?Her pro sodomy stance?Her anti Constitutional stances,Her Socialist stance or what?
May I ask why,just curious,is it her pro murder stance on killing unborn babies?Her pro sodomy stance?Her anti Constitutional stances,Her Socialist stance or what?
At least she agrees with Bush on something.
Emmanuel
06-15-2007, 11:09 AM
May I ask why,just curious,is it her pro murder stance on killing unborn babies?Her pro sodomy stance?Her anti Constitutional stances,Her Socialist stance or what?
If something is not yet born, then is it alive?
May I ask why,just curious,is it her pro murder stance on killing unborn babies?Her pro sodomy stance?Her anti Constitutional stances,Her Socialist stance or what?
Bang up job you guys have been doing buddy. keep up the good work. Abortions are down right? Pro-murder stance, what a joke. Pro-sodomy, again, I am literally laughing at my computer at this ridiculousness. Anti-constitutional? You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you? Socialist? Someone needs a poli-sci class and a good look at what is happening in our country right now. Now, if you would like to get in the creationism and anti-evolution debate to go along with this hilarity have at it, it would be fitting.
Bang up job you guys have been doing buddy. keep up the good work. Abortions are down right? Pro-murder stance, what a joke. Pro-sodomy, again, I am literally laughing at my computer at this ridiculousness. Anti-constitutional? You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you? Socialist? Someone needs a poli-sci class and a good look at what is happening in our country right now. Now, if you would like to get in the creationism and anti-evolution debate to go along with this hilarity have at it, it would be fitting.
Don't forget embryonic stem cells, babykiller.
Don't forget embryonic stem cells, babykiller.
Hey, I do what I can. Sometimes I just sit out on the back porch, destroy stem-cells and have me some good ol' fashioned sodomy. I can't help it, I have been doing it every day since I saw Hillary speak on television. Its called socialism.
Hey, I do what I can. Sometimes I just sit out on the back porch, destroy stem-cells and have me some good ol' fashioned sodomy. I can't help it, I have been doing it every day since I saw Hillary speak on television. Its called socialism.
I call that "Saturday".
Nixon's Head
06-15-2007, 12:05 PM
Bang up job you guys have been doing buddy. keep up the good work. Abortions are down right? Pro-murder stance, what a joke. Pro-sodomy, again, I am literally laughing at my computer at this ridiculousness. Anti-constitutional? You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you? Socialist? Someone needs a poli-sci class and a good look at what is happening in our country right now. Now, if you would like to get in the creationism and anti-evolution debate to go along with this hilarity have at it, it would be fitting.The space bar is nice too.
Andy Bulldog
06-16-2007, 06:42 PM
Imza gunna rite in Hugh Hefner..:D
Andy Bulldog
06-16-2007, 06:44 PM
If something is not yet born, then is it alive?
Yup..life begins at conception..thats when the process begins..:eek:
Tom Joad
06-16-2007, 07:24 PM
Yup..life begins at conception..thats when the process begins..:eek:
Why isn't everyone considered nine months older than we are?
Andy Bulldog
06-16-2007, 07:28 PM
Why isn't everyone considered nine months older than we are?
They are called Birthdays,thats just when you do it is all..
Tom Joad
06-16-2007, 07:33 PM
They are called Birthdays,thats just when you do it is all..
Which makes you wonder why we don't count back nine months to figure out when our life "really" began...
Andy Bulldog
06-16-2007, 07:47 PM
Which makes you wonder why we don't count back nine months to figure out when our life "really" began...
Sume peepz dont know when dey werre concieved though and then you have premature births ecetera..so its eazier to just go from the day one beez popped or sliced out..:D
Unlike me daughter,she wuz concieved August 15th exactly and born on May 15th..aZ Fur meez,I dont hazz a klue to when I wuz concieved.
And actually we are 9 or six or wutever months older,pepz just dont recognize it.
Andy Bulldog
06-18-2007, 08:47 AM
Obama would be a mistake,Radical Muslims hate us already,if we elected a person that left Islam,that person would be another reason for terrorist to attack us or to go after a president.Obama was raised a Muslim,but claims he is a Christian now.
Obama would be a mistake,Radical Muslims hate us already,if we elected a person that left Islam,that person would be another reason for terrorist to attack us or to go after a president.Obama was raised a Muslim,but claims he is a Christian now.
Again, I have no response.
Sume peepz dont know when dey werre concieved though and then you have premature births ecetera..so its eazier to just go from the day one beez popped or sliced out..:D
Unlike me daughter,she wuz concieved August 15th exactly and born on May 15th..aZ Fur meez,I dont hazz a klue to when I wuz concieved.
And actually we are 9 or six or wutever months older,pepz just dont recognize it.
Ok. Seriously?
Andy Bulldog
06-18-2007, 11:00 AM
Again, I have no response.
Then neither do I..:D
Andy Bulldog
06-18-2007, 11:01 AM
Ok. Seriously?
Serious as a squirl gathering nuts for the winter.:D
KinjaKahn
06-30-2007, 09:55 AM
Ron Paul for President, because he is not for sale. He speaks the truth.
Tom Joad
07-02-2007, 12:11 PM
Obama would be a mistake,Radical Muslims hate us already,if we elected a person that left Islam,that person would be another reason for terrorist to attack us or to go after a president.Obama was raised a Muslim,but claims he is a Christian now.
It's not like he's Salmon Rushdie.
hannitykillspuppies
07-03-2007, 12:07 PM
May I ask why,just curious,is it her pro murder stance on killing unborn babies?Her pro sodomy stance?Her anti Constitutional stances,Her Socialist stance or what?
are you even old enough to vote?
ryr8828
07-03-2007, 04:30 PM
Ron Paul for President, because he is not for sale. He speaks the truth.
Fred Thompson for President, because he also speaks the truth, and unlike Ron Paul he will have a chance.
hannitykillspuppies
07-03-2007, 05:40 PM
Fred Thompson for President, because he also speaks the truth, and unlike Ron Paul he will have a chance.
i can't see anyone who was prominently involved in "necessary roughness" being president.
ryr8828
07-03-2007, 06:19 PM
i can't see anyone who was prominently involved in "necessary roughness" being president.
Clinton was President.
hannitykillspuppies
07-03-2007, 06:37 PM
Clinton was President.
he was in "necessary roughness"?
ryr8828
07-03-2007, 08:54 PM
he was in "necessary roughness"?
I'm sorry. The women called it unnecessary roughness.
swordfish
07-21-2007, 08:38 AM
I just read some of this. I will be totally honest. I cannot sell out and vote for Fred Thompson just because he has a chance to win. That sounds like some sheep mentality bullshit to me. If people were more proactive about being free and having the liberty granted to them in the Constitution they would vote for Ron Paul regardless of speculation on winning.
Tom Joad
07-21-2007, 10:47 AM
I just read some of this. I will be totally honest. I cannot sell out and vote for Fred Thompson just because he has a chance to win. That sounds like some sheep mentality bullshit to me. If people were more proactive about being free and having the liberty granted to them in the Constitution they would vote for Ron Paul regardless of speculation on winning.
I'm still not voting for Thompson or Paul. Screw 'em both.
I was listening to Drudge (It was all I could find) on the way home tonight, and he said that Paul always wins his poll for the Republican vote. Says he is getting threats from Paul supporters too if he won't cover him more...lol
Also said that Paul keeps winning the polls on the ABC sites when they are up. Have the Paul supporters tapped into the polls, or what? I have a hard time finding one person in 10 that have even heard of him before.
KinjaKahn
08-06-2007, 11:25 AM
I was listening to Drudge (It was all I could find) on the way home tonight, and he said that Paul always wins his poll for the Republican vote. Says he is getting threats from Paul supporters too if he won't cover him more...lol
Also said that Paul keeps winning the polls on the ABC sites when they are up. Have the Paul supporters tapped into the polls, or what? I have a hard time finding one person in 10 that have even heard of him before.
Ron Paul for President 2008!! Ron Paul wins when you put his message before thinking people.
There is a love affair between the media and a Guiliani vs Billary ticket. There will be no moving away from that goal in the main stream media.
Jiddy78
08-06-2007, 11:28 AM
Ron Paul for President 2008!! Ron Paul wins when you put his message before thinking people.
There is a love affair between the media and a Guiliani vs Billary ticket. There will be no moving away from that goal in the main stream media.
And thus, the man's naivety is exposed.
This weekend I talked to several people about the election. Not one of them ahd ever heard of Ron Paul. Quite a few said they liked Rudi. I asked why? They couldn't say. I asked if it was because he was "America's Mascot" like JoePa is the mascot of Penn State and they looked at me like I was an ass hole.
A few people still like Obama, but rarely anyone I tlaked to liked Hillary. Most of all these people are Dems from what I could gather about their beliefs. They also all believe that if either were to get nominated/elected that they would get shot.
OF all the people I talked to, they all had heard of Rudi, Hill, and Obama. Nobody had heard of Paul.
The Clinton/Bush dynasty is a concern for most I've talked to and want to see the cycle broken even if they are gullible enough to believe that Billy was as great as the minorities think he was.
Andy Bulldog
02-13-2008, 09:47 AM
Okay,Okay All joking aside(my previous posts).
Im thinking of voting for Obama,because I agree with most of what he stands for and he doesnt seem like a person that would try force his religious beliefs down our throats.
McCain on the other seems to be just more of what we already have and Hillary flip flops more than the ones I have on my feet.
As for the other things I said before nd a few others,here is my real stance on some of the issues:
Homosexual issues,Abortion,religion,interracial marriages,gambling,prostitution etc all should be left up to the persons involved,not decided by the national or state government or any other group.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.