Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Salty, Jan 4, 2014.
If Rand Paul became the Republician Nominee:
In this crazy, godless world we live in RuPaul has a better chance of winning.
What are you implying padre, people who support Paul are godless?
It's too early for this poll anyway, but I guess we're all getting anxious for a change....
At the moment, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are the only two Republicans I'd vote for.
RuPaul is a cross-dressing drag queen(that may be a redundant) , TV host and a few other strange-things freak of a human popular among people who like that sort of thing. He is, apparently, not related to Rand Paul. :thumbsup:
The only man who has a chance of winning, either as an Independent or as the Republican nominee, is Ben Carson. He will capture the black and Hispanic vote based solely on his ethnic background. They will adopt the "boot straps" message he preaches to them as their own, having abandoned it 25 years ago when "Rev." Jesse Jackson gave it up when the socialists/Democrats compromised him and convinced him to abandon the Rainbow Coalition because it preached the same "boot straps" message Carson carries. Why? Because the socialists wanted to enslave the black vote to welfare, and if Jackson was telling them they didn't need welfare, it defeated their purpose. Jackson was promised national office. Did he get it?
Of course not. They never intended to give him one.
In part it would depend on who the Dem candidate would be.
Oh, OK, dumb me. Thanks.
(Rand Paul I like, I could've done without knowing about RuPaul )
We could all do well without knowing him... or her... or it.....
"It." Without doubt.
You must be fairly young. Think blacks supported Clarence Thomas? Condoleezza Rice? They will not support a conservative no matter what.
Do not underestimate the determination of marxists to sieze and retain power.
You don't pay much attention to the others on the board, do you, Aaron? Have you ever read any of my posts where I have shared personal information and life history? In fact, I can think of a couple of them were in direct reply to posts you made.
You don't pay much attention to the world around either, I guess. Try Googling Carson's numbers and see where his support is.
Do not underestimate the power of God, who put this clown in office for a purpose, and is just as likely to give us a chance to wake up and right ourselves with someone like Carson.
Can't say as I have, but you're acting a bit juvenile here, too. In your thirties? You're a pup. Older, then your mentality is in question.
One can only underestimate God's power, but that's not the chief error here. I think it's the underestimation of God's resolve to render to a people the fruit of the seeds they've sown.
It depends on a lot of things......
Once again you prove the cockalorum lives, and apparently stubbornly so.
Against Ben Carson-----Hillary would win, hands down!!
Against Condy Rice----Hillary would win, hands down!!
Against Ted Cruz----Hillary would win, hands down!!
Against Rand Paul----Hillary would win, hands down!!!
Socialism is to the lower class what stinkbait is to Catfish---to the fisherman the stinkbait stinks---but to the Catfish---stinkbait is a Popcicle!!!:tonofbricks::type:
I have no clue. But if Rand Paul does run in 2016, I can see myself voting for him. He has libertarian leanings, and unfortunately I do not believe that a third party candidate would make it. I tend to think the only way for a libertarian or something like it to get in such a high office would be to run republican like Rand Paul is doing.
[URL="http://www.ontheissues.org/Ben_Carson.htm]Ben Carson on the issues[/URL]
Among other things, since this is a very lengthy list:
Economy & Debt
1990s deregulation paved way for 2008 economic meltdown.
Cut every agency spending by 10%, with no exceptions.
Marriage should not be extended to same-sex couples.
Redefining marriage is slippery slope with disastrous ending.
Legal binding relationship for gays to enjoy property rights.
Tithing teaches about not hoarding as capitalist greed.
Highest corporate tax rate causes highest national debt.
Bible endorses flat tax--10% tithing.
Nothing in Constitution supports redistributing wealth.
Not unpatriotic for rich to take advantage of loopholes.
(Synopsis): Education is for everyone and should be made affordable, not free
War on Terror
Petroleum independence would deprive terrorists of funding.
Intelligently tap our own resources offshore & in Alaska.
Rome's decline began with immoral lifestyle; like in America.
Freedom is why people come from Cuba to US, not vice versa.
US poverty pales compared to billions in India & Africa.
Human nature makes giving up power difficult.
Lengthen House term to 6-10 years, with no re-election.
Bloated government keeps itself busy to justify existence.
Health savings account from birth; teach poor responsibility.
Regulate insurance companies as non-profit services.
Government responsibility for catastrophic coverage through a "health care stamp"
Frivilous, excessive or tort-for-PR-purposes litigation would end with "loser pays" arrangement.
Roman Empire fell because military was stretched too thin.
Ethical world leadership stops bullies with brutal force.
Tyranny follows if we disarm nukes & madmen get them.
No right to assume that our way was right for 1960s Vietnam.
Morality of war in Iraq was highly debatable.
Better response than post-9-11 invasions: oil independence.
Overwhelming majority want the southern border secured.
Deportation is moral low road; create guest worker program.
Charities better at providing for needy than the government.
Those who don't want to work? They are on their own.
Government entitlements compete with private-sector charity.
Eradicate poverty by providing education and requiring work.
It should be obvious to anyone who pays any attention to me at all that I don't agree with Carson on every point. What we forget is that it is actual opinions that shape our government and its actions, not some adherence to a particular political theory or doctrine. It is time to shed the "conservative", "libertarian", "Tea Party" name tags and look for a man who will hold to convictions, not theories, who will take action, not make speeches.
That's Ben Carson.
Chances are just about anyone running in the right wing parties I'm going to more or less agree with as far as economic issues go--or at least what they PROFESS to believe. And I'd prefer any of them in office over a statist (for lack of better word), so long as they keep their promises. But chances are I'm going to more or less disagree with social conservatives.
Sorry, I don't see many policy positions here, I see a lot of lecturing. (And I like Ben Carson.) He's going to need to do a better job of communicating his positions. Here are some policy positions that I see: